Appointing a party wall surveyor: what the Act requires

There is no statutory qualification for a party wall surveyor. The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 defines a surveyor as any person who is not a party to the matter, appointed or selected under section 10 to determine the dispute. That is the whole of the competence test in the legislation. A neighbour could appoint their cousin, provided the cousin is not a party.

What the Act does control, tightly, is the mechanics. The appointment must be in writing. Once made it cannot be rescinded. And the surveyor's duty is to the Act rather than to the person paying, which is the part most owners misunderstand.

Why there is no statutory qualification for the role

The Act is a dispute resolution statute, not a licensing one. Parliament set up a tribunal of surveyors to settle the questions the Act raises and left the market to supply the competence. In practice the competent pool is drawn from chartered building surveyors and chartered structural engineers who hold a party wall specialism, and the professional institutes maintain registers and faculties covering it.

The absence of a statutory qualification matters because the surveyor's decisions bind both owners. An award can determine the right to execute the work, the time and manner of doing it, and liability for costs. Appointing someone without party wall experience produces awards that are vague where they should be precise, and it is the adjoining owner who usually suffers.

Check the person's register entry, their experience of the specific work type, and their professional indemnity cover before appointing. Checking a professional institute register and reading a consultant CV for real competence both apply here.

Agreed surveyor against two appointed surveyors

Once an adjoining owner dissents from a notice, or fails to reply within 14 days and is deemed to dissent, a dispute exists and section 10 applies. Two routes open.

The parties can concur in the appointment of one surveyor, the agreed surveyor, who acts for neither owner and determines the matters in dispute alone. It costs less and moves faster, and it works when both owners accept that the surveyor is impartial.

Or each owner appoints their own surveyor. The two appointed surveyors then act together, and must forthwith select a third surveyor. This route costs more and suits cases where the works are substantial, the relationship is poor, or the adjoining owner wants someone who will scrutinise the design.

An adjoining owner who does nothing at all can find a surveyor appointed on their behalf under the ex parte provisions, because the Act does not allow one party to stall the process by refusing to engage.

Selection of the third surveyor and its purpose

The third surveyor is not a chair. They sit unused in most cases, selected at the outset and never called upon. Either owner or either of the appointed surveyors may refer a matter to them, and the third surveyor can then determine it alone.

That design is deliberate. It means a single appointed surveyor cannot block an award indefinitely, and it gives an owner who thinks their own surveyor is being unreasonable somewhere to go. The third surveyor's fees fall to be determined like any other costs under the award.

Pick the third surveyor properly rather than reaching for the first name in the address book. A referral is expensive and the person who takes it decides the point.

What the appointment must contain to be valid

An appointment under section 10 must be in writing. Beyond that the Act is silent on form, and the useful appointment letter names the appointing owner, identifies the property, identifies the adjoining property, states the statutory provision under which the appointment is made, and is dated and signed.

Three traps recur. An appointment made before a notice has been served and dissented from is premature, because no dispute yet exists. An appointment by someone who is not an owner within the meaning of the Act, such as a short-term tenant or a party acting without authority, is ineffective. And an appointment that purports to let the owner withdraw it conflicts with the Act, which provides that an appointment cannot be rescinded.

Where a surveyor dies, becomes incapable of acting or declares themselves incapable, a fresh appointment can be made. Where an appointed surveyor refuses to act or neglects to act for ten days after a written request, the Act allows the other surveyor to proceed alone on the matter.

Fees, who pays and how they are challenged

The surveyor or surveyors determine the costs of making the award and who pays them. The usual outcome is that the building owner pays, on the basis that the works are for their benefit and the adjoining owner did not ask for any of it. That is a convention rather than a rule, and costs can be apportioned differently where an adjoining owner has behaved unreasonably or asked for work beyond what the Act requires.

Challenging fees goes through the Act, not through a complaint. Refer the question of costs to the third surveyor, or appeal the award. An owner who simply refuses to pay an award that includes costs is in breach of the award.

Illustrative example. An owner digging a basement under a Victorian terrace serves notice under sections 2 and 6. The neighbour dissents and appoints their own surveyor. The two surveyors select a third, agree a schedule of condition with photographs of the neighbour's plaster and party wall, and make an award covering sequencing, monitoring, access and reinstatement. Later cracking is checked against the schedule, which settles in an afternoon what would otherwise be a year of argument. The details here are illustrative only.

The award, the schedule of condition and compensation

The award records what has been determined. A competent award identifies the works, attaches the drawings, sets out the method and sequence for the notifiable elements, deals with access and working hours, and incorporates a schedule of condition of the adjoining property.

The schedule of condition is not required by the Act. It is the single most valuable document in the process, because it fixes the state of the neighbour's property before work starts and converts later damage arguments into a comparison exercise.

The Act gives the adjoining owner a right to compensation for loss or damage resulting from work carried out under it, and requires the building owner not to cause unnecessary inconvenience. Either owner may appeal an award to the county court within 14 days of service of the award. That deadline is short and is not extended by negotiation.

Where planning permission is irrelevant to the process

The two regimes do not touch. A basement extension with full planning permission still needs party wall notices. A rear extension built under permitted development, with no application at all, still needs them. And a party wall award gives no authority whatever to carry out development that needs planning permission or building regulations approval.

Nor does an adjoining owner's dissent under the Act affect the planning application. Dissent is not an objection, it is the trigger for the statutory process, and a case officer determining an application has no role in party wall matters.

Party wall work is one of several things PlanScope does not produce. Its report types cover the planning submission itself, and you can see the full set on the report index, while reviewers who can sign off technical drafts are listed in the professional directory. Reports should be reviewed before submission and PlanScope does not guarantee planning approval.

This is general guidance, not legal advice. Appointments, awards and appeal deadlines under the Act have real consequences, so take advice from a qualified professional before acting.