Thanks for all the posts. Been in touch with our solicitor and he says that the architect could be in the wrong, but he advised us to get another architect report to confrim that the orginal report was bogus.
At this point im unsure to go ahead with this as it may be throwing good money after bad. I hear architects are very expensive, does anyone know of a good architect person/company?
--------------------------------------
Preamble
The below comments are justified in terms of current practice in the building industry and are made as far comment in the public interest based on the facts presented by the OP.
Any advice you receive here will be compromised by the lack of drawn information shown the route of the sewere and all the buildings it serves.
There appear to be several unknown factors here.
You don't state whether this manhole serves a run which is wholly private to you or whether it exists on a public or private shared main sewer.
You don't state whether it serves a Foul Water, Surface Water or Combined Sewer.
I will assume its a Foul Water Sewer and comment on both (i) wholly private and (ii) shared private and public sewer below:
Private Drain:
There may have been a good reason why the MH was left where it was.
The positions of manholes relative to the direction of the pipe run has to achieve a certain geometry to facilitate the flow of effluent.
In no case can you have an acute angle on a route, the minimum angle is 90 degrees, so you may find it may be impossible to move the MH.
Regardless of the foregoing, on a restricted site it may be impossible or unwise to divert around the extension.
Where you cannot move a manhole, you should at least maintain access to it for rodding purposes.
This in turn may be the reason for the raised timber floor, an unusual form of construction these days, although very popular in the days before visqueen under concrete slabs.
Public or Shared Private Main Sewer:
Some estates in Dublin have private sewers running along the back gardens.
In one location I am aware of, the sewer behind the houses may in fact be a public sewer.
Both sewer types may have legal prohibitions on building over them.
What little information I have on private sewers suggests they may be diverted within your own site.
Alternatively it may be possible to build over them, but MH's should be provided either side of the extension to allow them to be kept clear.
As noted by another poster, precautions have to be taken to protect teh site as it passes through any rising walls.
This is usually done by installing arches or lintols to keep the walls loads off the pipe, and some space should be left above the top of the pipe to allow for settlement.
The building regulations specify concrete encasement as one method of protecting the pipe as it passes beneath a building, but their may be others, including using strengthened cast iron pipes.
The public sewer cannot normally be built over, and more onerous than that, the Council may require a ROW the width of a JCB or more to be left to allow later access for repairs and/or relaying.
This raises concerns that one of the previous owners in title may have committed an offence.
Preventative Measures:
You should ensure that the MH currently poses no health problems and is properly vented to an FAI to prevent the build up of sewer gas under the house.
Foul sewers should normally be vented at the head of the run by the soil vent pipe, and at the last manhole where it leaves your site, via a Fresh Air Inlet located not too far away.
The timber floor under which it is situated should be ventilated by vent bricks or grilles in the perimeter rising walls and you should ensure these are not blocked by earth or plants.
As noted elsewhere in these responses, you could consider replacing the existing installation and installing a sealed manhole.
Legal Matters
The legals on this one are unclear but assuming the extension is not compliant; -
- Before pursuing your architect and surveyor, check the exclusions list on the reports and see they are limited to "visual inspection only" and state that "no opening up works were undertaken, save where specifically referred to in this Report."
- If not, both inspecting parties may be open to a claim.
- If the aforementioned exclusions are there, they may provide a good defence.
- If the inspecting professionals are defended by their exclusions, you may still have an avenue of redress through the solicitors.
- Check to see what your own solicitor asked for on the Requisitions in Title, for example, did they inquire after the status or otherwise re Planning Permission and Building Regulations of the extension.
- If they asked nothing, they themselves may be liable.
- If they asked good questions, and the vendors solicitor either confirmed compliance [did you get Certs?] or admitted nothing, then they may be liable.
- Finally if the property was sold with architects opinions then the certifying architect may be liable, but again, watch out for those disclaimers.
Best of luck and perhaps you might revert to let the forum know how you get on.
HTH
