The short answer
Where an adjoining owner is elderly, unwell, disabled or otherwise vulnerable, the process needs care, patience and flexibility, but vulnerability does not suspend the Act or require the building owner to wait indefinitely or abandon lawful works.
Why it matters
The ordinary procedure still applies — notices served where the Act applies, consent or dissent, surveyors appointed if there is a dispute, and an award where required; there is no separate exemption. A common practical problem is access: a vulnerable owner may be unwilling or unable to allow internal access for a schedule of condition. An internal schedule is good practice but not always possible and not a legal requirement in every case, so surveyors should not let its absence paralyse the process. Proportionate alternatives include an external condition record, photographs of elevations, gardens, boundary walls and visible defects, time-stamped photos from the owner or family, video calls where appropriate, and a final inspection based on available evidence and judgement. Surveyors must balance the adjoining owner’s health, safety and comfort against the building owner’s right to proceed, avoiding unnecessary inconvenience while keeping cost and delay proportionate.
What to do now
- Handle communication calmly and respectfully, with clear, non-threatening letters.
- Where internal access is refused, use proportionate alternatives rather than stalling.
- Consider involving a family member or representative if the owner wants support.
- Keep the statutory steps moving while accommodating genuine needs.
Common mistakes
- Treating vulnerability as an exemption from the Act.
- Letting a lack of internal access paralyse the process.
- Using a tone that alarms or pressures a vulnerable owner.
When to call Coburns
If a matter involves a vulnerable adjoining owner, on either side, get in touch and we will handle it sensitively while keeping it lawful and proportionate.