Banker in row over loft conversion which is ‘too close’ to millionaires’ home

(Image: Champion Information)

A banker has been accused of ‘trespassing’ by her millionaire neighbours – in a authorized row over a loft extension.

Liz and Adam Peck, who personal a £1.5 million dwelling in East Dulwich, say Debbie Ranford’s work has triggered injury to their flat.

The couple have demanded it both be torn down, or that they be paid compensation for the alleged injury.

Mrs Peck, who runs a gender-neutral kids’s clothes enterprise, and Mr Peck, a singer-songwriter, say Mrs Ranford’s extension triggered a ‘massive crack’ of their wall and has triggered water to leak into their dwelling.

They're now suing their neighbour at Central London Nation Courtroom.

The conversion was inbuilt 2014 after Mrs Ranford obtained consent from her neighbours, the court docket heard.

However Mrs Peck, 49, informed the court docket the banker had instructed contractors to ‘construct on the boundary line’ and ‘encroach onto their property to affix the dormers.’

However Mrs Ranford stated this was ‘unavoidable’.

The couple say the loft conversion wasn’t what they initially agreed to (Image: Champion Information)

Each properties have comparable loft conversions – however there isn't any hole between them (Image: Champion Information)

The court docket was informed the neighbours had as soon as loved good relations and, in 2014, Mrs Peck had even been given a torchlit tour of the extension after a cocktail party.

However animosity grew because the years progressed.

Mrs Peck informed Choose Simon Monty QC there had been an understanding a spot can be left between Mrs Ranford’s loft conversion and her neighbour’s comparable extension, to permit for upkeep work.

Mrs Peck stated: ‘We had no consciousness that subsequent door had constructed up and onto our property.

‘To see that, it's a must to be proper on the finish of our backyard. Given the celebration wall discover we had signed, we had no trigger to test on the works.’

Her husband added: ‘It was fairly a shock to grasp and uncover that one thing very totally different had been constructed.’

An aerial view of the East Dulwich properties at centre of loft conversion row (Image: Champion Information)

Mrs Ranford claims the Pecks consented to her constructing on prime of the ‘celebration wall’ separating the 2 properties (Image: Champion Information)

Representing the couple, barrister Richard Egleton claimed the work had resulted in ‘clear trespass’ and that it must be dismantled.

He informed the court docket: ‘The claimants additionally contend that the works have interfered with the structural integrity of their property and triggered injury in that in 2015, and once more in 2018, they skilled leaks and cracks within the celebration wall at first flooring stage. The injury quantities to a nuisance.’

Mrs Ranford has beforehand unsuccessfully tried to promote her flat twice, the court docket heard.

Giving proof herself, the banker stated hearth rules and climate proofing made it ‘unavoidable’ for the work to be carried out in some other method.

She claimed none of two-storey flat’s precise extension infringes on the Pecks’ ‘facet’ and that solely ‘infill’ materials overlapped between the 2 properties – to affix and weather-proof the extensions.

Mrs Ranford informed the decide: ‘We've got not crossed over the wall when it comes to our constructing.

‘The one overlapping half past the celebration wall is for the aim of climate proofing.’

She added: ‘The pragmatic answer is to nominate a surveyor to advise us on a subsequent step. We have been all the time prepared to observe a joint surveyor.’

The trial continues.

.