Homeowner fumes as neighbour’s huge extension leaves property inches from his house

A homeowner has sparked a turf war after his huge extension saw his house move less than eight inches of his next-door neighbour’s property.

Disgruntled Stuart Smith, 42, from Kings Norton in Birmingham, bemoaned the “bizarre” and “overlapping” extension had stopped him from accessing the side of his home.

He claimed a “catalogue of errors” led to a wall having to be built close to his home because the neighbour’s new roof didn’t fit.

Stuart now fears drainage and damp issues could now develop because the guttering on both properties touch.

Planning officers for Birmingham City Council are now probing the extension, which saw works carried out over a garage to increase the property size from three to five bedrooms, BirminghamLive reports.

“It’s come over the boundary on the same land – effectively you have two buildings occupying the same space. It’s like a catalogue of errors right the way across,” Mr Smith told the site.

“It’s been built so far over the boundary line onto our side there’s no gap to be able to maintain our own property.

“We can never remove the gutters now, we can’t unfix the felt roof, or the fascias or render the side of the house. It’s like that permanently now and any problems we’ll have to live with.

“I did speak to the neighbour at that point and they said they would ‘sort it out’, but (the builders) didn’t fix it, they just worked around it, bodged it, recessed it in, built a little flat roof and built the roof to the side – Bizarre.”

Mr Smith’s neighbour, who had the works carried out, said he had co-operated fully with council officers and “it is for them to decide” the outcome.

When approached by BirminghamLive about the works, the resident, said: “I’ve already spoken to the city council. Leave it to the council to sort out.”

A Birmingham City Council spokesperson added: “We have received a complaint that works are in breach of planning legislation.

“The matter is currently under investigation and officers are in discussions with both the owner and complainant.”