Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Our upstairs neighbours have illegally installed a toilet that is leaking sewage into our downstairs flat. I informed the council at the time that is was an unauthorised installation and they said "We'll send the landlord a letter" but nothing further was heard and the installation went ahead. Now that the toilet is causing a major problem by leaking brown water into our flat, I'm having no luck with the council as they seem reluctant to intervene in any way. Can anyone advise on what I can do in this situation? Thanks!
Thanks Tiddles. I have tried councillor Barber, who was initially helpful, but when stonewalled by the council has stopped returning my calls or emails. I have raised a stage one complaint, to address this and other issues concerning behaviour of upstairs LH which was dealt with by the local housing officer, but we were effectively fobbed off, indeed received a net sanction about leaving our bike in the hall. We are at our wit's end. I am going to try to raise complaint to a stage two with the aid of the CAB. Waiting to hear.

I was definitely thinking of going to the local press.

I didn't catch that story. I would have thought the worries of a single leaseholder would not garner that much national interest. It's so difficult though to be productive when I have this gnawing situation that never resolves itself. (this is just the latest in a series of awful situations)

Unauthorised by the council. They are leaseholders, as am I with LBS being the landlord. All alterations that affect the structure of the building need prior written consent.


"The lease says that you must ask the council?s permission if you want to make any alteration to your home. This includes things such as changing the bathroom or kitchen fittings, because they are the landlord?s fixtures and fittings ? although the lease makes you responsible for looking after them.


"In general we will not refuse permission, provided that what you want to do is done to that part of the premises demised to you, and does not affect the structure of the building..."


The cast iron toilet stack, which is definitely considered part of the structure has been smashed off above the existing first floor toilet and replaced in plastic into which a new second floor toilet has been plumbed. The issue is that a pressure balancing pipe exists which nowadays terminates in our bathroom wall somewhere but is now subject to brown water seepage when the second floor toilet is flushed.

I phoned the council as the guy was about to heft the sledgehammer to smash 100year old perfectly serviceable soil stack to try to get them to intervene. They didn't want to get involved. The upstairs LH verbally threatened me whilst I was on the phone to the extent that the council, on hearing it, recommended I call the police. Later when I tried to get the promised witness statement, they went silent, refusing to answer my questions or return my emails...

The main trouble is the pipe is all original cast iron, which doesn't lend itself well to modification. All the above could be achieved in plastic, but it would require removing the entire stack, including excavating it from the walls and the sewer and re-plumbing all the toilets. it would be far easier to remove the offending toilet and make other provisions for it.

The council would have most likely rejected permission to do the work as LHs are not allowed to affect the structure of the building or allow works to negatively affect other occupants.

Although I seek a pragmatic solution, the main point is that I tried to get the council to intervene before it went ahead, and they actively failed to do so, which gave their tacit approval to a contravention of building regulations, and one that has caused me considerable distress.

If it was the only cause I had for distress concerning the LH, then I would probably just wear it, but there is a history of vile abusive language, threats, intimidation, appalling building methods, workmen defecating in by passageway, you name it, I have suffered it. Three contractors have so far come and looked at the pipe and thought it beyond their ability to fix. When they do finally get round to fix it, I will be charged half of the cost, effectively subsidising his shoddy work. So mainly I am furious, and want someone to do something about it.

The council refuse to answer my reasonable questions, even to respond to my request for the building insurance provider's details to make a claim for damages incurred. Rant over. I am trying the CAB route, stage two complaint, then the press if that doesn't work.

It sounds so awful, I would certainly contact the press for sure, and do everything by email or letter by recorded delivery. Include photos of damage.Surely this is a health risk. Southwark council are really a joke, they usually pass most work that leaseholders want to do because they get paid for it, regardless of damage caused to adjoining neighbours. If I had a neighbour or neighbours like that I think I would have been arrested by now, no way would I let them get away with sewerage leaking into my home. Really Sorry to hear what sounds like hell. Maybe when all is sorted sell up and get away from your neighbours! anything connected to Southwark council is in my experience problematic. Best of luck lousmith.
Thanks Delanie. It sure has been awful. We can't even sell up and move out as a survey would flag the damp and its cause. Been here 20 years. And yes, I also have been sorely tempted to lump him, getting myself arrested in the process. I fact he has threatened me on at least four occasions, saying i'm going to f**k you up you inbred c**t, once coming round with his brother, forcing entry to my flat and chasing me through neighbour's gardens. The police allowed themselves to be manipulated into believing them when they flatly denied it. It almost feels like a weird conspiracy. Maybe it is.
Oh my god, him and his brother doing that to you! He is seriously sick in the head, or just an evil scum bag. I really hope you can get it sorted. whatever else is going on in your life, I'd say this needs to take priority and some advice is needed quickly, what a nightmare, I really do hope you get it sorted, our homes are our sanctuary and it saddens me how horrible people can be. Really the best of luck and let us on forum know the outcome.
Thanks again Delanie. I am starting a stage two complaint via Southwark as I can get free assistance with that, they should have acted to help the situation, but have done zilch. I am out of town for a week from today, so won't be able to reply to any further post until then, but I thank you and the other posters for your words of support.

Ahh, weird conspiracy indeed. Have nightmare neighbour for NINE YEARS (usual antisocial behaviour, dog starved in rubbish tip of garden with rats, cat starved, noise all hours, arguing all hours, threats, screaming kids (one taken away), so many people in flat at one time that they were pooing in bags and leaving them outside (ending up in my bin). Police, social services, council, 2 illegal sublets (sub-letters both gave letter in saying they was paying rent - but the tenant denies so these are not evidence!). NINE YEARS OF DIARIES ... None good enough! STILL THERE !!

The council can also put acceptable behaviour contract on tenant for life of tenancy you are told, but they are only enforced when monitored, so for e.g., if sub-let and quiet and you haven't someone monitoring then this is void and you start again with the diaries! ITS DIGUSTING always favouring the scumbags.


GET ON TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE SEWAGE IN YOUR HOUSE.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...