Which neighbour is right here?

[BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz]

Two neighbours live in a pair of flats (like a converted house). Two flats only. Two neighbours only. I'll call them Up and Down.

Up has access to a private yard to the right of the property. Down has access to a separate private yard to the left of the property.

Down has windows which overlook both their own and Ups yard. Ups windows overlook both as well but from above.

Up has repainted their yard, it was white along outer walls previously which have been repainted white, but in addition, Up has painted the walls which belong to Down. So outer walls of Downs property, meaning all walls facing into their yard are now white.

Up thinks this is reasonable as Down cannot see these walls, cannot access them without permission of Up, and the paint is an improvement.

Down thinks this is unreasonable as the walls do not belong to Up and to do so was not on, and that Up should pay to have the walls stripped of paint.

So....who is right in this situation?
YABU - Down is correct, paint should be removed
YANBU - Up is correct, paint should stay

How does Down even know if they can’t see it?

Anyway, should you just paint brick or should it be rendered first?

Up is in the wrong. Is Down going to take it further?

Up should have asked permission first but now that it’s done down should let it go since it doesn’t really affect them.

Hi @steppemum,

sorry, but in law you are not allowed to attach things to your neighbours wall or fence. That fatc that many people do, and that often people don't care is beside the ponit. You are not - technically- supposed to.

It really is quite complicated.

Under Section 38 of the Law of Property Act 1925 the ownership of a party wall is deemed to be severed vertically, but with cross rights of support. This means that you can do what you like to your side as long as you do not prejudice the stability of the wall.

This is complicated by the Party Wall Act. And in this case there are leases, and I suspect a company owning the freehold.

And we're getting all the information third-hand from the next-door neighbour!

And in this case there are leases, and I suspect a company owning the freehold

There is no company owning the freehold. They each own the lease for the opposite flat. That's it. No third parties.

At the front of my house one of the side walls is in the neighbour's garden, and at the back hers is in mine. I'd be furious if she painted my wall even though I would only see it if approaching the house from that side. It's my wall and I don't want it painted!

Down is totally justified in being annoyed, although since they've done the same with their yard, I think they might let it go.

But a house wall is not a party wall in this context. It is not shared structurally at all. Up can put up their own fence in front of the wall and paint that white if they want a white look.

@WeaselKnickers

It's not a party wall though. It's owned outright.

It's Down's wall and it was probably wrong of Up to paint it without asking. Presumably it's got to keep being painted now. I'd be concerned if I thought it hadn't been done properly or it affected e.g. damp getting in. This is especially true as Up hasn't painted their own part of the exterior wall. I'd expect both to have to agree to changes to the property in the same way as you wouldn't have Up pay the entire cost for a new roof just because it's on top of their bit.

I would have been livid if someone had painted by bare brick, I hate pa8nted brick and then I would stuck with the Maintenance of it.

Does it really matter if the walls look better ?

All sounds very petty.

It's not legally shared structurally but if Down took it down Up's flat would fall down - and no longer be, therefore, up!
Poor you OP having to listen to the pair of them...

I have a joint boundary wall that's unpainted. If neighbour painted their side fair enough. If they painted my side in be seriously pissed off because I personally prefer the look of unpainted brickwork, and paint peels within a few years so the upkeep would then fall to me, and white gets discoloured pretty quick. The person who painted the wall may think it looks better as personal choice, but the other neighbour may not view it as an improvement.

There is no company owning the freehold. They each own the lease for the opposite flat. That's it. No third parties.

Are you sure about this? They can't own the leases for the opposite flat. That doesn't make sense. They must own the leases for their own flat. The question is who owns the freehold. It will very often be a company in which they each own a share and are directors of.

I'm not a conveyancer I should add! But I would just repeat that it is more complicated than is being made out here (like very many AIBU legal threads!)

this clarifies the lease issue

Very common in our area.

It's not a party wall though.
That's not entirely clear. Even accepting that ...

It's owned outright.
By whom? We don't know!

3cats I can’t even believe it’s up for debate You can’t paint someone else’s house! I can’t see the back of my head but it doesn’t mean the person sitting behind me on the bus looking at it is allowed to shave it because they like shirt hair!

*short

Technically the one who painted the wall should have asked. The wall owner is correct, it’s their wall and they can insist on having the paint removed. However they are a total twat. How does it affect them?

I painted the wall facing my garden which belongs to my neighbour. He’d never have known but I asked him anyway. He was amazed I asked and said yes.

Interesting @BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz!

I've never heard of that, hardly surprising because I'm not a conveyancer anywhere, never mind the NE!

The website says:
The owner of the First Floor Flat (FFF) will own both the leasehold title to their flat but also the freehold title to the Ground Floor Flat (GFF) and vice versa.

So superficially Up does seem to own the freehold and therefore the structure of Down's flat, and can paint the wall. But as I've said a dozen times, it's complicated, and needs someone who actually knows something about it all to read the leases.

The walls shouldn't have been painted without asking for permission.

Removing the paint, is it water based? will cost a fortune

@WeaselKnickers

There is no company owning the freehold. They each own the lease for the opposite flat. That's it. No third parties.

Are you sure about this? They can't own the leases for the opposite flat. That doesn't make sense. They must own the leases for their own flat. The question is who owns the freehold. It will very often be a company in which they each own a share and are directors of.

I'm not a conveyancer I should add! But I would just repeat that it is more complicated than is being made out here (like very many AIBU legal threads!)

You're wrong there, I have a close family member who lives in a flat with exactly the arrangement the OP describes.

You might now have heard of it but it's definitely a thing.

I rent out a flat where I own the leasehold for the downstairs and freehold for the upstairs and vice versa. It’s not uncommon.

Sorry, only read half the thread. I’d assumed it was a garden wall. Yeah if I was the home owner I’d be annoyed about my actual house being painted......though can’t really logically say why as it doesn’t affect the house and can’t be seen from the flat owners garden?

Hi @TerrapinStation

I'm definitely right! I'm getting childish about it now. They don't own the leases to the other flat. As I said that makes no sense. Read the website that @BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz linked to.