Hi LJ2

I have gone through my diary, the times and dates the EH officer visited, wind directions and all the information is in our favour.

from what I understand about these things:

Stay unemotional when making your arguments

Sticks to the facts, don't be tempted to exaggerate or push things too far

Very important to show that you have followed the correct procedures of complaint, giving your neighbours and the relevant authorities a reasonable chance to do what they should do. That you haven't jumped the gun in running to the courts. So yes, its important to show that you have explored all avenues including the Ombudsmen etc in trying to reach a reasonable conclusion and that you presenting your case now is a last resort.

From what I understand, if you follow these guidelines you will be looked on much more favourably when presenting your case.


Wood being dry when burnt is very pertinent

Posted By: bot de pailleWood being dry when burnt is very pertinent

Again!! We have been through this a few times now - the last time only on the last page. The amount of dirty smoke (from bad wood) is irrelevant at best and a dangerous distraction at worst!!! The only relevance is that the manner of checking/assessing etc of the wood may be additional evidence to show how badly the relevant authorities have handled stuff. Remember: it is a requirement to burn good wood but both smoke from good wood and bad wood is BAD when it comes out of a flue in an environment where is then goes straight down into the next door house. The flue issue is the only important point in this! The local micro-environment may simply not allow any normal flue to function in such a way as to enable the smoke to be dispersed relatively harmlessly - many, if not all, of the relevant regulations and guidelines could perhaps be strictly adhered to and still allow this smoke to go where it should not. The regs etc were created to enforce the unalienable right to good quality air, but perhaps they are not enough in this scenario - hence having to go to court.

Imagine winning damages, and a court injunction requiring excellent wood to be burned, random checks enforcing said injunction: what a pigging disaster that would be.

In so far as solving the type of wood will not stop Mike being killed; it will just mean that it takes just a little longer and is a more pleasant experience.

Posted By: Mikeee5This can only mean one thing "The Chimney Is Not Working Properly".

That is the nub of the issue.

The type of fuel is irrelevant, the Judge could say don't burn wet wood, so I'll now burn coal, or paper, or rubbish. All of these emit smoke that should be discharged at a height that will allow dilution and dispersion, so as not to cause a nuisance.

Has anyone come across Ecodesign and Energy Labelling of Energy Related Products for Local Space Heaters? I have read that Ecodesign aims to add new challenging limits for efficiency and emissions of room heaters, stoves and open fires and that many stoves that meet current legislation will be withdrawn from sale as they will not meet the new European Standard.

I wonder how that will affect appliances that have already been installed?

""Many parts of the UK are smoke control areas where you can’t emit smoke from a chimney unless you’re burning an authorised fuel or using exempt appliances, eg burners or stoves"" quote from - https://www.gov.uk/smoke-control-area-rules.

So you can emit smoke, so long as you are burning an approved fuel, in most stoves either 'wood logs' or 'dry wood logs' (appliance dependent). http://smokecontrol.defra.gov.uk/appliances.php?country=e

The chimney should be designed to dilute and disperse the pollutant.

From Building Regulations Part J - Flues should be high enough to ensure sufficient draught to clear the products of combustion. The height necessary for this will depend upon the type of the appliance, the height of the building, the type of flue and the number of bends in it, and an assessment of local wind patterns. However, a minimum flue height of 4.5m could be satisfactory if the guidance in Paragraphs 2.10 to 2.12 is adopted. As an alternative approach, the calculation procedure within BS EN 13384-1:2005 can be used.

Posted By: bot de pailleIts to find out what the cause of the nuisance is and bring about the correct solution.

So to break the problem down.

The stove is DEFRA exempt, so it's been tested to a standard. No problem there.
The Chimney meets Part J of the Building Regs. I assume it does, so no problem there.
The fuel meets a standard? An approved fuel, in most stoves is described as either 'wood logs' or 'dry wood logs' (appliance dependent). This bit looks very wooly to me.

The stove should also be set up in accordance with the DEFRA exemption conditions, which requires stops to be fitted to limit the closure of the primary, or secondary, or both air inlets. Clearly if you close the air inlet too much you get incomplete combustion and hence smoke. Maybe this could be part of the problem - I assume the guy is operating the stove to the correct combustion temperature and uses a stove thermometer to ensure the correct temperature is achieved?

One final thought, as far as I'm aware the preexisting health condition has no bearing in this case. I may be wrong?!!

However however in certain, not unusual weather conditions, like a still frosty morning, like this morning for instance.
I observed various boiler flues discharging smoke/vapour, which drifted back down to near ground level, as I drove past various settlements.
So what is "reasonable" in respect of flue emissions nuiscence?
Marcus

The building regulations themself only have this to say. This is from the legislation itself and can be found here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2531/contents/made (in the schedules)

J1.  Heat producing appliances shall be so installed that there is an adequate supply of air to them for combustion and for the efficient working of any flue-pipe or chimney.

J2.  Heat producing appliances shall have adequate provision for the discharge of the products of combustion to the outside air.

The "approved documents" are not gospel - but any talk of "meeting building regs" is generally incorrect - the regs as far as this is concerned are very very simple:

"J2. Heat producing appliances shall have adequate provision for the discharge of the products of combustion to the outside air."

no more, no less.

The "approved documents" all come with this very BIG disclaimer at the front. It means, in effect, that work in accordance with the approved documents is NOT guaranteed to meet the regulations:

The intention of issuing Approved Documents is to provide guidance about
compliance with specific aspects of building regulations in some of the more
common building situations. They set out what, in ordinary circumstances,
may be accepted as reasonable provision for compliance with the relevant
requirement(s) of building regulations to which they refer.

If guidance in an Approved Document is followed there will be a presumption
of compliance with the requirement(s) covered by the guidance. However, this
presumption can be overturned, so simply following guidance does not
guarantee compliance; for example, if the particular case is unusual in some
way, then ‘normal’ guidance may not be applicable.

However, I would also argue that even if the system is deemed to meet the regulations, it is still causing you a "nuisance" in law by adversely affecting your health/enjoyment of your property.

I would keep it simple , not get distracted on vagaries of quality of wood being burned or compliance with part J - your problem is the affect on your health, caused by the smoke that comes down the chimney. The rest of the information can be used to rubbish anything put forward in defence , rather than a case for your "prosecution"

-Steve
(I am not a lawyer, so treat as you feel free)

I spoke to the Expert Witness last night and he is fully prepared to attend court to defend his report.



Mikeee5

That's the Holy Grail - with the guy along how can you lose!

Thats great news. Did you manage to contact the press?

Something about pouring concrete down their chimney i think. Plan z

Ah ok, I had the impression the court date was imminent

Hi Mikee5.

Sometime ago, you mentioned that you had used FOI to get information from your council about their visits to your neighbour. Was there any reason you didn't use the Data Protection Act to get the information ?

Thanks,
Gareee.