aboleth wrote:
On 3 May, 19:09, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article ,
Brian Sharrock wrote:

_Across_ the party wall? Do you mean _penetrating_ the PW so that
part of your steel joists will be visible from your neighbours'
side of the PW.? The usual practise is for the joists to be fitted
to 'hangars' on your sides.

Of course houses vary in construction but with mine the party wall
is 9" brick so you simply remove one bricks worth of thickness and
cast in a padstone.


This is indeed the plan. We may joint the steels to get them in.
Front- back is much longer and there is a bay, plus the party walls
are designed to be load bearing, all the floor joists run side to
side. It's the standard way to do it around here.

While I accept that if I want to do work for my benefit, I should pay
for any surveys, it does seem unfair that an uncooperative neighbour
can force me to have to shell out for two surveyors. If all the
involved parties did this, I would be facing a hurdle of several
thousand before I could even start work, so effectively my neighbours
could make it impossible to proceed.

Why do you think you should be exempt from complying fully with the Act?
Your neighbours are entitled to the protection that the Act gives. It also
gives you some protection if anything goes wrong with work the surveyor(s)
have approved. Regard as a form of insurance.

Peter Crosland