Hello, the foundation slab of our garage extends right up to the property boundary. Unfortunately, the garage itself (mainly the ventilated wooden facade) protrudes about 8 cm over the boundary line along a length of 7 m (23 feet) and this extends beneath the neighbor’s garage roof, which overhangs by 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) here (there is a green strip). We have come to an agreement with the neighbor and naturally, we do not want to carry out unnecessary demolition.
The question now is whether we should inform the authorities immediately or just wait to see what the land registry office says when they come to re-measure in two years.
The question now is whether we should inform the authorities immediately or just wait to see what the land registry office says when they come to re-measure in two years.
Dirk Grafe schrieb:
This happens every day for various reasons.
Best regards,
Dirk GrafeI once discussed this with various workers and specialists. They all agreed that in new construction, work and measurements are done very precisely. Since you are also a professional, I would be interested to know what could cause this in newly developed residential areas.Quite simply: hardly any of the workers and professionals you have spoken to are technically qualified to verify a boundary marker found on site unless they are a licensed surveyor or similar. If boundary markers are missing (sometimes deliberately, due to postponed staking to prevent damage during construction), even less so. Mistakes also simply occur due to incorrect measurements and planning. Added to this are differences between on-site staking and cadastral coordinates, which are hard to understand for both laypersons and architects/planners. This sometimes leads to subsequent legal rulings that are completely incomprehensible to non-experts.
Or, for cost reasons, surveyors are skipped during staking because surveyors are considered too expensive and unnecessary. The "cleanup" then costs 5 to 10 times more, and in court cases often even up to 100 times more.
The 8cm (3 inches), for example, is a typical deviation between the structural shell and the outer wall. It is quite possible that the outer wall was staked out, but the structural shell was built along this line. It is also common to align with the neighbor’s garage when boundary markers are missing. If you assume the neighbor's garage is correctly positioned but it's not, the error continues...
To be fair, there is indeed a higher standard in new development areas today than 20 or 30 years ago. Nevertheless, such encroachments still happen for various reasons, especially around garages. However, this is not a dramatic issue and is only recorded in the cadaster for informational purposes, as mentioned. Ultimately, the key point is whether the affected neighbor is actually restricted and how severe that restriction is, as well as how it can be resolved.
If — as in this case — the area of the encroachment is less than 1m² (11 sq ft), one has to ask where the impairment lies that would justify a demolition or similar measure.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
Or, for cost reasons, surveyors are skipped during staking because surveyors are considered too expensive and unnecessary. The "cleanup" then costs 5 to 10 times more, and in court cases often even up to 100 times more.
The 8cm (3 inches), for example, is a typical deviation between the structural shell and the outer wall. It is quite possible that the outer wall was staked out, but the structural shell was built along this line. It is also common to align with the neighbor’s garage when boundary markers are missing. If you assume the neighbor's garage is correctly positioned but it's not, the error continues...
To be fair, there is indeed a higher standard in new development areas today than 20 or 30 years ago. Nevertheless, such encroachments still happen for various reasons, especially around garages. However, this is not a dramatic issue and is only recorded in the cadaster for informational purposes, as mentioned. Ultimately, the key point is whether the affected neighbor is actually restricted and how severe that restriction is, as well as how it can be resolved.
If — as in this case — the area of the encroachment is less than 1m² (11 sq ft), one has to ask where the impairment lies that would justify a demolition or similar measure.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
U
Username_wahl20 Mar 2016 15:54The boundary was actually clearly defined; it must have simply gone wrong during the execution planning.
If a garage is built next to another garage and the reduction of 8cm (3 inches) only causes both buildings to be slightly closer together, it is unlikely to cause a significant problem. However, as previously calculated, you are effectively using 0.72m² (7.75 square feet) of your neighbor’s property. At prices around 200€ per square meter, this is not insignificant. The simplest solution is to reach a written agreement with your neighbor. You pay a one-time fee for 1m² (or 0.72m²) and document it in writing, then just keep the agreement on file.
It looks much worse if the neighbor does not yet have a garage, carport, or something similar, and those 8cm (3 inches) are needed— for example, if it’s a prefabricated garage or similar.
In our area, buildings are usually constructed so that there is at least about 10cm (4 inches) of free space to the neighbor rather than going all the way to zero.
For public authorities, it generally does not matter who builds or places non-registerable structures where, as long as no one complains. However, this situation is not ideal, since it can lead to problems later with heirs or during a sale (whether by yourself or the neighbor).
It looks much worse if the neighbor does not yet have a garage, carport, or something similar, and those 8cm (3 inches) are needed— for example, if it’s a prefabricated garage or similar.
In our area, buildings are usually constructed so that there is at least about 10cm (4 inches) of free space to the neighbor rather than going all the way to zero.
For public authorities, it generally does not matter who builds or places non-registerable structures where, as long as no one complains. However, this situation is not ideal, since it can lead to problems later with heirs or during a sale (whether by yourself or the neighbor).
Payday schrieb:
If garages stand next to each other and the 8cm (3 inches) closer spacing only means that both buildings are slightly closer together, it hardly becomes a real problem. As long as there is enough space on the other side for access, it’s not an issue.
As already calculated, you are effectively taking 0.72m² (7.75 sq ft) from the neighbor. At prices around €200 per m², that’s not cheap. The simplest way would be to reach a written agreement with the neighbor. You pay a one-time fee for 1m² (or the 0.72m²) and document it in writing, then leave it at that. Nice idea, but unfortunately illegal. To acquire even one square meter, that area must be officially separated and transferred to the buyer’s plot through a purchase contract and land register update. Otherwise, it has no legal effect.
Since the effort is not worth it for just 1m², it is usually handled differently.
It looks bad if the neighbor doesn’t have a garage/carport or similar yet and needs those 8cm (3 inches), for example because it is a prefabricated garage or similar. In our area, buildings are typically constructed with around 10cm (4 inches) clearance to the neighbor rather than directly on the boundary. That also has disadvantages. In dense developments, every centimeter is used, and there is no room to keep distance.
Public authorities generally don’t care much about who has what non-registrable structures, as long as no one complains. Of course, it’s still not ideal because it can cause issues later with inheritance or when selling (either by yourself or the neighbor). Public institutions often don’t care because, contrary to popular belief, they usually have no interest in investigating every garden shed.
Garages, however, generally require registration; at least I am not aware of any federal state where they do not. Regulations for carports vary by region, but—for example—in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), carports are recorded in the land register when measured simultaneously with the main or other auxiliary buildings including their boundary references. This makes sense, even though carports themselves are not required to be individually surveyed in NRW.
Furthermore, building unregistered or unauthorized outbuildings (so-called “illegal structures”) regularly causes problems when applying for retrospective building permits, whether for one’s own extension or a neighbor’s expansion including easements on the illegally built property.
At this point, the only advice is to at least plan and construct illegal structures so that they can be legalized if necessary. Because if someone eventually does complain, you can legalize the structure with reasonable effort (for example, by paying an additional fee imposed by the building authority on top of the permit costs).
Best regards,
Dirk Grafe
Dirk Grafe schrieb:
Nice idea, but unfortunately illegal. To buy even one square meter, that square meter must be separated and officially added to the other parcel through a purchase contract and land registry transfer. There is no other way to make it legally effective.
No one is talking about legal validity and/or official confirmation. It’s about making the neighbor satisfied and avoiding any issues. As you said, there are other solutions if the owner has no problem with it. Our house stands exactly 6 meters (20 feet) from the boundary line to fit a carport that is theoretically 6 meters (20 feet) wide. If they were to theoretically take 8 centimeters (3 inches) from us, the driveway area would also be about 8 centimeters (3 inches) narrower later, which wouldn’t be ideal for the double carport. Since the neighboring property hasn’t even been sold yet, this can’t happen to us.
Similar topics