My shed and backyard as it is right now

[AlexS]

Sounds like the council is just trying to avoid doing what they are obliged to. Maybe if you suggested to them that instead of taking him to court, you were thinking about taking them to court....

[Enfield Guy]

Sounds like the council is just trying to avoid doing what they are obliged to. Maybe if you suggested to them that instead of taking him to court, you were thinking about taking them to court....

Yes, this is pretty much in line with my thinking. It seems strange to me that the private certifiers tick off the development with a council seal, yet council claims to have no control of the use of this seal. My thoughts are, their seal = their responsibility. I shall be discussing this with a certifier that I know, and a friendly solicitor.

Cheers

[Peter57]

Had a similar problem at my sister's place. The neighbour ran their drive stormwater into a pipe and through the fence into her side yard. It contributed to a small flood even inside her ground floor.

Once it was in her yard, we figured it was her property so we filled it with expandable foam. Problem solved - well for us it was.

[corbs]

Sounds like the council is just trying to avoid doing what they are obliged to. Maybe if you suggested to them that instead of taking him to court, you were thinking about taking them to court....

This and a suggestion that Today Tonight or A Current Affair are interested in the story may also help. While I despise those types of shows and the journalism they represent, they do love a story about councils. Good luck.

[ian]

IIRC you have the right to dischage water across your neighbour's land provided yopu don't first concentrate it in a pipe. If the neighbour has effectively constructed a dam on the property line, fixing the drainage problem becomes his.

I don't recall you saying if you and your neighbours share the "community infrastructure" or if the pipe is council's or if it collectively belongs to you and your neighbours. I'm thinking that if the "community infrastructure" that carries the storm water from you and your neighbour's properties to the local creek, someone has the responsibility to fix it. Now that someone may be council -- in your case, because it is undersized I think it only right that they pay for your damage till it's fixed.

I know insurance companies get a bad rap most of the time, but if you're insured and if their assessor agrees that the damage is due to your neighbour's or Council's negligence, you should be able to sit back and watch the fireworks.

But after your check with the local community legal centre, you may find that you're supposed to share the cost with you neighbour -- in that case perhaps suggest that you share the costs, you'll bring the 10T excavator to dig the drainage trench across his yard, if he'll clean up afterwards.

[Enfield Guy]

Brisbane city council operates under a specific piece of legislation, City of Brisbane Act 2010. Other councils operate under separate legislation, go figure!!

I had previously been informed by council that the pipe in question is "community infrastructure". Seems strange that "community infrastructure" can be highjacked by an individual for their own exclusive use, even though it is patently inadequate to serve the purpose to which it is now put. He has 8 or 9 90mm downpipes from his house going into a 150mm terracotta pipe. I'm not sure that a hydrologist would agree with the certifier as to the adequacy of the system, the numbers just don't add up. This is Queensland where 50mm an hour is not an unusual amount of rainfall.

I note that in the response from council that they refer to the pipe in question as a "private stormwater line". It seems that the nomenclature has changed to suit the situation.

I have friends who work within other councils, Logan, Byron, and others. They, through enquiries within their own jurisdictions, have all said that the issue would be investigated by council officers and that I would be spoken to by a council officer in the course of those investigations. Not so Brisbane City Council. They talk to the certifier, certifier says nup, all is ok, council then contacts complainant and says the certifier says that it is all ok. Council also states at this point, "Unfortunately, council has no jurisdiction over private certifiers. There is nothing to indicate that the system as installed would be deemed unlawful."

Happy days!!

Good to see council working for the community isn't it. I'm so happy to be paying my rates right now.

Cheers

[Christos]

Amazing.

Just so amazing that this can go on.

[Sturdee]

Brisbane city council operates under a specific piece of legislation, City of Brisbane Act 2010. Other councils operate under separate legislation, go figure!!

You will find this is the same for all capital cities, definitely for Melbourne. Difference is that I think the Brisbane council area is much larger and encompasses most of Brisbane whereas Melbourne Council is just the central area of Melbourne.


Peter.

[AlexS]

There are several ways to work out the size pipe needed. If you can find a library with "Australian Rainfall & Runoff" including the maps that go with it, look up 'Rational Method' and 'Intensity-frequency-duration methods'. They will give you ways of calculating peak runoff. A good hydraulics text will give you the size of pipe ended.
These are general methods and apply more to ground runoff rather than roof runoff. You will also probably find that there are building codes that give simplified ways of calculating it from rooves, but I'm not familiar with them, nor how accurate they are, but they're usually pretty conservative.

[Tonyz]

I know insurance companies get a bad rap most of the time, but if you're insured and if their assessor agrees that the damage is due to your neighbour's or Council's negligence, you should be able to sit back and watch the fireworks.

.

Insurance company investigation= end of story not your problem apart from ratty neighbour

[ian]

There are several ways to work out the size pipe needed. If you can find a library with "Australian Rainfall & Runoff" including the maps that go with it, look up 'Rational Method' and 'Intensity-frequency-duration methods'. They will give you ways of calculating peak runoff. A good hydraulics text will give you the size of pipe ended.
These are general methods and apply more to ground runoff rather than roof runoff. You will also probably find that there are building codes that give simplified ways of calculating it from rooves, but I'm not familiar with them, nor how accurate they are, but they're usually pretty conservative.

Hi Alex

the method in ARR still works with a roof, you just set the ground cover part of the run-off factor as equal to 1

from memory the biggest chalenge when using ARR is that the area of a roof is very small compared to the catchments it's designed for.

[ian]

Brisbane city council operates under a specific piece of legislation, City of Brisbane Act 2010. Other councils operate under separate legislation, go figure!!

I had previously been informed by council that the pipe in question is "community infrastructure". Seems strange that "community infrastructure" can be highjacked by an individual for their own exclusive use, even though it is patently inadequate to serve the purpose to which it is now put. He has 8 or 9 90mm downpipes from his house going into a 150mm terracotta pipe. I'm not sure that a hydrologist would agree with the certifier as to the adequacy of the system, the numbers just don't add up. This is Queensland where 50mm an hour is not an unusual amount of rainfall.

I note that in the response from council that they refer to the pipe in question as a "private stormwater line". It seems that the nomenclature has changed to suit the situation.

I have friends who work within other councils, Logan, Byron, and others. They, through enquiries within their own jurisdictions, have all said that the issue would be investigated by council officers and that I would be spoken to by a council officer in the course of those investigations. Not so Brisbane City Council. They talk to the certifier, certifier says nup, all is ok, council then contacts complainant and says the certifier says that it is all ok. Council also states at this point, "Unfortunately, council has no jurisdiction over private certifiers. There is nothing to indicate that the system as installed would be deemed unlawful."

Happy days!!

Good to see council working for the community isn't it. I'm so happy to be paying my rates right now.

Cheers

you might be able to have quite a bit of fun with this.

If by "community infrastructure" council means the 150mm pipe is "owned" by the owner whose property it passes through and all the users are supposed to pay to upgrade it, your contribution to the upgrade could be to borrow an excavator and dig the trench the new larger pipe will need. Just dig the trench leaving the excavated material on site.

[Enfield Guy]

Insurance company investigation= end of story not your problem apart from ratty neighbour

The problem I see with this approach is that the insurance company may pay to have the Fyrechech replaced on the rear wall of the shed, but they will not persue the neighbour for cost recovery. They will simply increase the premium that I pay and the problem will become ongoing.

The other issue is that while the shed is included on my home insurance the machines and equipment may be deemed commercial and therefor not covered. Proper commercial insurance to cover the shed is very, very expensive according to my research.

cheers

[artme]

Who was it said "The law sir, is an ass".???

[Bob38S]

Who was it said "The law sir, is a pain in the ass".???

I agree if this is what you meant.