Problems with neighbour - bad building, trespass, intimidation, property damage

[nw0307]

Give us a couple of days to think about it????
In the meantime can you post up the particulars of claim (and possibly your draft defence if you have yet worked on it)/

Hi there. Do I send this to you in a pm or post the document but redact the personal details?

[echat11]

Hi there. Do I send this to you in a pm or post the document but redact the personal details?

Upload it, redacting personal details.

[nw0307]

Hi there, here's the claim form.

I don't have a defence drafted out properly but here are the main points in date order:

April 2021 - I was told the roof needed repair. I was fine about this as the neighbouring roofs in the block had recently been repaired and assumed it would be a similar cost.

May 2021 - The Claimant changed his mind and said he wanted a new roof. It didn't need renewing as I had several tradesmen view it. This was a personal preference and upgrade the Claimant wanted to add value to his property. The repair of my side of the roof would have been adequate to ‘protect the property’ as stated in the Lease. (emails as evidence)

May-July 2021-I received one quotation and the promise of more. They didn' appear until two months later in July. The Claimant said he had already chosen which he was using without my consultation. I objected to this and the claimant wouldn't reply to my solicitors requests to allow me to get my own quotes and have access to his roof space. (emails as evidence)

July 2021 - I was obstructed in every effort I made to get my own quotes. The Claimant wouldn't allow me to organise them and sabotaged two alternative assessments I had pre organised by misleading my chosen tradesmen so they couldn't attend. I can give a full account of what occurred which was very disingenuous. (emails as evidence)

July 2021 - Despite the obstruction from the Claimant to get my own quotes, I managed to get two written quotes, and 3 verbal quotes for a strip, re-slate, scaffold and skip. All of these were between £4,500 and £5,000. Nowhere near the £7,500 quote the claimant got. All my tradesmen agreed that this quote was grossly inflated. When I objected to the quote I was told I had no say in the matter, as I was the tenant, and he was the landlord and it was his decision. (emails and statements as evidence)

August 2021- My solicitor repeated several times to see a full breakdown of the work for my part of the roof. The Claimant refused as he said he is the landlord and doesn' have to provide this. My solicitor then said if he went ahead with the work, then that is his choice but in no way was I in agreement with work I had no detail of. My solicitor said a full breakdown must be given by the contractor with correct costings. This has never been given. (emails as evidence)

October 2021 - Claimant was still being vague about his intentions to later strip the roof off to make a roof terrace and dorma. I objected to paying hundreds of pounds for a re-roof when it could be undone in the next year. Some of the roof work was done in preparation for this dorma project and nothing to do with me. (emails as evidence)

October 2021 – Claimant sent me the invoice. Part of this clearly covers work that is extra such as dismantling a chimney to the front of the building, and with regards to the chimney on my side, the claimant needed this work done so he could install 2 new chimney pots and a flue for a wood burner. Therefore, all the pots needed re-seating. That is his choice. It's renovation work for his property, not mine. (emails as evidence)

October 2021 – When I objected to how this work had been organised and costed, the Claimant also tried to ask me for extra money for scaffolding for his own building projects and then his roof insulation. (emails as evidence)

October 2021 - Using the invoice for one of the repaired roofs in the same block, if this roof had been repaired at the same time (which was offered by the roofer but refused by the Claimant) the cost would have been approximately £600 so my share would be £100 which is what I have offered the Claimant several times. He has refused this offer as well as my offer to go to mediation. (invoice and emails as evidence)

November 2021 - If the Claimant had been courteous and honest in this matter, I would have been prepared to offer him a share based on one of my quotes for the re-roof even though a re-roof wasn't needed. However, he has responded with threats, intimidation, and unreasonable behaviour, not only to myself but towards my solicitor for several months. So much so, I had to contact the police and have three complaints with crime numbers due to his behaviour and malicious correspondence. (emails as evidence)

13 December - The claimant’s solicitor sent a letter to my solicitor that hasn't been instructed to act on my behalf for over four months. I asked for another letter to be sent. I got a poor-quality pdf via email which was illegible, and it stated, wrongly, that I had to pay a third of the full roof. I wasn't given a final figure from the claimant in the email from his solicitor. How could I pay for something I wasn't given a full and final bill for? (email as evidence)

21 December - I received the claimant’s solicitor letter just before the Christmas break. They gave me 14 days to pay (the undisclosed amount) over this period.

4 January 2022 - They filed this claim after 13 days, when I had already replied to their solicitor on the 3^rd. Perhaps sending final letters before claim just before the Christmas break so I can’t contact their solicitor wasn't the most helpful thing to do and they then filed prematurely.

[des8]

Could you post up the part of your lease which deals with repairs etc to the joint roof?

I know you blanked out the signature on the claim form but I read it as MR & MRS.
If that is correct the wrong claim form has been used
This is a pilot scheme which has been used and the claimant must be a sole claimant

PRACTICE DIRECTION 51R – THE ONLINE CIVIL COURT PILOT 2.1(3): claim is only suitable for the pilot if all the following conditions are met:.......
(f) there is only one claimant making the claim, and the claimant informs the court that there is only one defendant;

I think you should possibly be giving the court a ring on Monday and ask what they intend to do as they should not have issued the form, but tagging R0b to see if he agrees, or thinks you just get on with a defence and counterclaim.

I'll progress defence tomorrow anyway

[nw0307]

Could you post up the part of your lease which deals with repairs etc to the joint roof?

I know you blanked out the signature on the claim form but I read it as MR & MRS.
If that is correct the wrong claim form has been used
This is a pilot scheme which has been used and the claimant must be a sole claimant

PRACTICE DIRECTION 51R – THE ONLINE CIVIL COURT PILOT 2.1(3): claim is only suitable for the pilot if all the following conditions are met:.......
(f) there is only one claimant making the claim, and the claimant informs the court that there is only one defendant;

I think you should possibly be giving the court a ring on Monday and ask what they intend to do as they should not have issued the form, but tagging R0b to see if he agrees, or thinks you just get on with a defence and counterclaim.

I'll progress defence tomorrow anyway

wow that's interesting. Yes they do everything together. I think they hope that double the idiocy is going to intimidate me. They've had previous court cases which they have lost and it's always as a couple. Yes the way the claimant was worded on the form seemed wrong. It was Mr and Mrs [first name male] [first name female] Surname which doesn't make sense.

The lease covenant regard the repairs is as follows:

(k)(i) At all times hereafter to contribute and pay one third of the cost of maintaining repairing and renewing the gutters fall pipes gas and water pipes drains conduits electric wires and other gas water and electric installations in and or upon the property or its curtelege enjoyed or used by the Tenant or his successors in title the owner or occupiers for the time being of the demised property in common with the Landlord or their successors in title the owner or occupiers for the time being of the retained property-----
(ii)The roof over the part of the retained property as lies over the demised property-----
(l) At all times hereafter to contribute one half of the expense of maintaining repairing or renewing the said steps and passageway leading from xxxx Road to the demised property.

I've included the passageway bit too because he's now gone off on one saying he's renewing all that and I have to pay half. However, the lease now seems incorrect because it's so old (1984). It seems that then, his property had ownership of the steps part (Although he is saying he owns steps, full passage, pathway and part of my balcony). However, looking at three title plans of the 3 properties that use that passage, it is next door, not his property that owns this passage area. More so, I have obtained a SIM index document which I outlined the areas in dispute and it came back with next door owning the passageway, and I own the pathway to my balcony so it's absolutely nothing to do with him anymore.

Just looked at one of the links previously given to me about claims and counterclaims and on the hallellis link it says:

"Counterclaims do not need to be connected or related to the claims made by the claimant. " Not sure if that is all different tracks including the small claims track?

Can't believe how helpful you've all been regarding this. I'm so grateful.

[des8]

Regarding counter claims, whilst they don't have to be connected to the claim they do arise from the same set of circumstances.
So in your case your neighbour is claiming a contributory sum of money for work carried out, but you counter claim for the disruption etc he caused whilst doing the work.
Your counterclaim is not connected to his claim but to the work disruption
Different claims from same set of circumstances
A better explanation a little way through this link perhaps: https://www.mylawyer.co.uk/respondin...-A76076D76692/

[echat11]

From what I understand, there is two sets of 'harassment' (I might be wrong).
One set pre dates the roof works, but also harassment during / after the roof works.

[nw0307]

From what I understand, there is two sets of 'harassment' (I might be wrong).
One set pre dates the roof works, but also harassment during / after the roof works.

ah I see. He was using the roof repair part of the lease (amongst others) as a way to threaten me with seeking forfeiture on my property. This was throughout last Spring and Summer when the roof quotes were ongoing. He had no evidence to support any reason to seek forfeiture on my property yet continued to threaten me and then contacted my mortgage provider and told them a pack of lies which then panicked them into phoning me as they thought I was losing the property!

Not sure if that can be included in the harassment as it does involve the roof demands?

[des8]

ah I see. He was using the roof repair part of the lease (amongst others) as a way to threaten me with seeking forfeiture on my property. This was throughout last Spring and Summer when the roof quotes were ongoing. He had no evidence to support any reason to seek forfeiture on my property yet continued to threaten me and then contacted my mortgage provider and told them a pack of lies which then panicked them into phoning me as they thought I was losing the property!

Not sure if that can be included in the harassment as it does involve the roof demands?

So i think that part of the harassment might be turned into part of your counterclaim.
Do you have any of this in writing, as written proof is more supportive than "he said"?

Haven't forgotten your defence.. just tied up at the moment!

[nw0307]

So i think that part of the harassment might be turned into part of your counterclaim.
Do you have any of this in writing, as written proof is more supportive than "he said"?

Haven't forgotten your defence.. just tied up at the moment!

Yes, I have at least 3 emails with him saying he's looking at seeking forfeiture of my property and was going to inform my mortgage provider. He kept banging on about I need to comply with what he was saying or he'd move to file with the First Tier Tribunal yada yada yada. My solicitors told him he couldn't seek forfeiture and that contacting my mortgage provider without a shred of evidence was wholly inappropriate. He did it anyway. I have the emails between myself and the mortgage company. He thought this could be a cheap (free) way of getting my property instead of just trying to drive me out and me selling it. Thought he could get a windfall property for nothing.

He was also telling neighbours that he needs to get me out and asking them to write witness statements about how I'm breaching all these rules which I'm not. They've actually told him to get lost and they won't be involving themselves in his bullying. A couple of the neighbours are willing to write a witness statement about it.

Thank you for all your help. I'm looking forward to reading the defence!

[des8]

Looking closely at the covenant as posted it does not appear that you have to do anything about the roof.
Under sec (i) you pay 1/3rd to maintain gutters etc
under sec(ii) there seems to be no requirements at all (or have you not posted the full wording)

[nw0307]

Looking closely at the covenant as posted it does not appear that you have to do anything about the roof.
Under sec (i) you pay 1/3rd to maintain gutters etc
under sec(ii) there seems to be no requirements at all (or have you not posted the full wording)

nope that is the full wording. I actually thought that but I guess the (ii) part means 'also the same for the roof' (meaning one third). However, I'm not sure with all this legal jargon. Like I say I've never objected to paying for repairs, just not open to get ripped off by a con man.

On another note. I got in touch with the courts and they've replied:

It is requested in the initial process that claims made using the Online Civil Money Claims(OCMC) service are only between one party on either side.

This is something that can be raised if the claim proceeds to a hearing as the only person who can amend the names of a party is the claimant.

It is recommended that you still respond to the claim or a Judgement in default can be requested against you.

[EnglandPi]

If you dont respond to the claim a judgement can be obtained by default.

[des8]

Still; fiddling with your defence, but that lease is IMO very poorly worded if it is exactly as you typed.
To make sense it should be written:
(k) At all times hereafter to contribute and pay one third of the cost of maintaining repairing and renewing:
(i)the gutters fall pipes gas and water pipes drains conduits electric wires and other gas water and electric installations in and or upon the property or its curtelege enjoyed or used by the Tenant or his successors in title the owner or occupiers for the time being of the demised property in common with the Landlord or their successors in title the owner or occupiers for the time being of the retained property-----
(ii)The roof over the part of the retained property as lies over the demised property-----

But it is what it is and so shall use it in your defence to pay nothing, and see what the court decides.
Courts are generally reluctant to do anything but interpret clauses as they are written.

[nw0307]

Still; fiddling with your defence, but that lease is IMO very poorly worded if it is exactly as you typed.
To make sense it should be written:
(k) At all times hereafter to contribute and pay one third of the cost of maintaining repairing and renewing:
(i)the gutters fall pipes gas and water pipes drains conduits electric wires and other gas water and electric installations in and or upon the property or its curtelege enjoyed or used by the Tenant or his successors in title the owner or occupiers for the time being of the demised property in common with the Landlord or their successors in title the owner or occupiers for the time being of the retained property-----
(ii)The roof over the part of the retained property as lies over the demised property-----

But it is what it is and so shall use it in your defence to pay nothing, and see what the court decides.
Courts are generally reluctant to do anything but interpret clauses as they are written.

wow, thank you, that's incredible. Yes I couldn't fathom that wording either. It is the worst set of deeds I've ever read. The boundary claim he's also currently bullying me on is worded even worse yet he is claiming all sorts of land with the word 'passageway'. Land that is nowhere near his property. He'll be claiming Rochdale canal (which is below my property) as his next, claiming that is a passageway lol