Who has to pay for a new Fence?

[littletee]

Hi everyone,

I'm building a 3 dwelling development and today the neighbour from the other side came over and introduced himself.

He asked whether we were going to put up a new fence and I told him I'd be up for it if he wanted to etc. He then asked if I was going to pay for it all because I'm the one constructing and I told him know that as far as I know if a new fence goes up the standard agreement is 50/50. Then he started saying crap like the Builders cut the fence down in a section without asking him (where the garage wall is on their property) but my builder told me he asked them to cut it down as the garage wall will be there anyway, and I believe him as he's very honest. There is a section now elsewhere that has a gap of about 50cm but I'm happy to get that fixed worst case scenario.

Anyhow, am I write that if the neighbour and I want a new fence then it is 50/50 all the way down the line??? If it isn't, I couldn't care less and I'll just keep the old fence there. If I'm not mistaken as well, Council leaves this up to the neighbours to sort out right and won't get involved???

Cheers,

littletee

 

[mystery]

Fence disputes cause so many issues between neighbors.

We are in the process of building a new house as part of a sub-division development. We just decided to pay for the replacement fence on two neighboring properties. It cost us $1500, but it stopped all the objections and we got the fence we wanted.

Sometimes its just not worth the hassle.

Mystery

 

[handyandy]

I think it is fairly standard for the Builder /Developer to put up new fences.

What do you want - to build a new development and then have crappy fences whilst you are trying to sell the properties? Not the ideal marketing approach.

Lets face it if the fences are in OK state then if I was the neighbor I wouldn't want to replace the fence as yet and dividing fence act or not there would be no way I would want to contribute.

Seems like your builder has already damaged the fence, irrespective of where the damage is, and as such he most probably has a strong case for not cooperating under the dividing fencing act.

Cheers

 

[littletee]

There's no damage from the builder to the fence except for a 50cm or so gap which I'm more than happy to fix if need be.

The fence is very old and whilst still standing, will need replacing at some stage.

I'm just upset the way he tried to put it on me saying that because I'm constructing, I need to pay for the full fence or the like. I don't think this is right, I've been told it's always 50/50.

 

[simo74]

Take a look here.
http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/lawreform/inquiries/article/1659

and here

http://www.fencingonline.com.au/disputes/victoria.htm

There's no damage from the builder to the fence except for a 50cm or so gap which I'm more than happy to fix if need be.

The fence is very old and whilst still standing, will need replacing at some stage.

I'm just upset the way he tried to put it on me saying that because I'm constructing, I need to pay for the full fence or the like. I don't think this is right, I've been told it's always 50/50.

 

[firstmillion]

I just finished a sub division in clearview, SA. I formally presented how the new fence will help the neighbour improve his property value, be more secure etc etc. I did attach a formal quote from from a fencing company and suggested the neighbour to contribute. Result - 1 agreed to pay and 2 did not bother. Still a good result as i was happy to pay for the the full fence myself.

 

[Shaneelastic]

Developer in my opinion.
They are the one really getting the benefit by nmaking it look allnew and nice

 

[Scott No Mates]

Check your DA/CC, often it will condition the DA with the developer erecting new fencing at no cost to neighbours.

The cost is minimal and it lowers buyer resistance.

 

[Dazz]

If you take your developer's hat off for just one second and pop on your neighbour's hat, you'd probably be able to see that the fence was just fine before you started doing what you were doing....and therefore everything is OKey dokey.

If you wish to tear a perfectly good serviceable fence down and replace it with a brand spanker, then I reckon you should have to cough for it 100%.

Yes, he gets a free bonus upgraded fence at no cost.....but you get what you wanted.

Other option is leave the old fence there....he won't care one joint....it was going to be there before you started your building works.

I don't think you've got any leverage against him at all, and therefore you should pay 100% of the bill for the upgrade of the fence. If you are good enough to negotiate even for him to chip in slightly, consider every bit of it a bonus.

 

[Melbournian]

if you're subdividing - then probably best to just pay for the fence.

if it's in an estate - the neighbour who builds first would be the one would probably wants payment first.

 

[Terry_w]

FENCES ACT 1968
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/fa196867/

 

[Dazz]

Thanks for the link Terry.

Looks like section 8 is the appropriate clause here.

It talks constantly about this "agreement" between the two parties prior to the existing fence coming down. I guess if you don't have an agreement with the adjoining owner, you'll have to try your luck with the courts.

If your builder just started taking down panels, and you assumed he'd cough for half the cost of the new fence, then you're out of luck.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/fa196867/s8.html


Based on that, I reckon you've got Buckley's of getting any money back for the cost of the new fence.