What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Pennsylvania
Hello,
My wife and I live in a rear property. When we bought the property, our sewer and water lines ran through the basement of the house in front of us (at one point, both properties were owned by the same person). A few months ago, the owners of the property in front of ours decided to tear down their house. They then told us we needed to take immediate action to have our pipes re-routed, because they were going to tear them out regardless.
There is a walkway that runs from the street through their property that we have an easement on. When we discussed our options, our neighbors agreed that they would have no problem with us moving the pipes so that they ran below the part of their property we had the easement on. Due to the lay of the land in the rear of our property, it was determined that this would be the most feasible solution, and that if running new lines from the back of the house was even possible, it would be extremely difficult and likely much more expensive.
All in all, their decision to tear their house down has cost us over $10,000.
In order to replace these pipes, we had to dig below the sidewalk in front of their property. Fixing this will cost approximately $800. In addition, the day after the contractor finished laying the new pipe and covering everything up again, our neighbors announced that they have decided to dig further down before levelling off their property, which would mean that our pipes would no longer be below the frost line, whereas if we had been notified of their intentions beforehand, we would have laid the new pipes further below ground, so this decision has negated an important aspect of the new location of the pipes.
My dilemma at this point is this: a lawyer in my family advised me not to pay the $800 for the sidewalk repair, because A.it is not on our property, and B.the initial action that resulted in the sidewalk being damaged was our neighbor's decision to tear his house down. My wife wants to use the sidewalk repair as a "bargaining chip", i.e. we'll pay your sidewalk bill if you promise not to lower the ground above the location of our new pipes, but I don't see how such an agreement can be made legally binding. We've already been through enough grief and stress over having to pay $10,000 due to someone else's actions. If we were to refuse to pay to repair the sidewalk and our neighbor were to take us to court, does our arguement carry any weight? Also, if he were to sue us, would a counter-suit for the $10,000 hold up at all? Thanks!!!
Hello,
My wife and I live in a rear property. When we bought the property, our sewer and water lines ran through the basement of the house in front of us (at one point, both properties were owned by the same person). A few months ago, the owners of the property in front of ours decided to tear down their house. They then told us we needed to take immediate action to have our pipes re-routed, because they were going to tear them out regardless.
There is a walkway that runs from the street through their property that we have an easement on. When we discussed our options, our neighbors agreed that they would have no problem with us moving the pipes so that they ran below the part of their property we had the easement on. Due to the lay of the land in the rear of our property, it was determined that this would be the most feasible solution, and that if running new lines from the back of the house was even possible, it would be extremely difficult and likely much more expensive.
All in all, their decision to tear their house down has cost us over $10,000.
In order to replace these pipes, we had to dig below the sidewalk in front of their property. Fixing this will cost approximately $800. In addition, the day after the contractor finished laying the new pipe and covering everything up again, our neighbors announced that they have decided to dig further down before levelling off their property, which would mean that our pipes would no longer be below the frost line, whereas if we had been notified of their intentions beforehand, we would have laid the new pipes further below ground, so this decision has negated an important aspect of the new location of the pipes.
My dilemma at this point is this: a lawyer in my family advised me not to pay the $800 for the sidewalk repair, because A.it is not on our property, and B.the initial action that resulted in the sidewalk being damaged was our neighbor's decision to tear his house down. My wife wants to use the sidewalk repair as a "bargaining chip", i.e. we'll pay your sidewalk bill if you promise not to lower the ground above the location of our new pipes, but I don't see how such an agreement can be made legally binding. We've already been through enough grief and stress over having to pay $10,000 due to someone else's actions. If we were to refuse to pay to repair the sidewalk and our neighbor were to take us to court, does our arguement carry any weight? Also, if he were to sue us, would a counter-suit for the $10,000 hold up at all? Thanks!!!