Problems with neighbors due to slipped soil

Presumably, it will even be quite bad because he also needs a building encumbrance from you for the (partial) filling of the remaining terrain, or else the removal or sloping towards the boundary and possibly the slope on his side must end 3 m before (!) the boundary at the maximum permissible height.

Hello Dirk,

Does the part about the distance apply in general?

With us, it is exactly the other way around. Our natural terrain was excavated by the neighbor and he set his retaining wall incorrectly (directly on the boundary), whereby a height of 1 - 1.30 m was removed on our property. After a long and unsuccessful back and forth, we have (grudgingly) accepted this for ourselves (nothing in writing). We hope that the wall, which the neighbor built himself, will eventually not withstand the pressure of the slope (it already tilted by 3-5 cm in the first year) and then the matter can be addressed again.
For me, it would now be purely informative to know:
Would our neighbor – if he wants to work legally properly – have to keep 3 m away from our property and only start sloping from that point? That is at least how I would interpret the quoted part. (Then the neighbor would be allowed to start the retaining wall at his house.)

However, we would not insist on that anyway. We are already happy if our “remaining property” becomes complete again.

Is there actually a statute of limitations here?

Hello f-pNo,

a clear yes and no. According to your description, it might actually be the case (you can tell from the wording that about 18 subjunctives are built in) that the neighbor would have to continue your original ground level for 3m and only then can slope it off.

However, this is a very delicate issue that cannot be assessed without knowledge of the building records.

Statute of limitations is also a topic that becomes quite difficult at this point because the law mentions the phrasing of the "natural ground surface" - there are various commentaries in the respective state version, but also discretion for judges who have to decide on this. This ranges from the interpretation that the new planned height (and thus the acceptance of the possibly illegally altered original height) comes with vegetation, i.e., as soon as grass/plants have permanently settled there by themselves, up to periods of 10, 20, or even 30 years after which a formerly artificial embankment is interpreted as a natural/grown/existing/generally accepted ground surface.

Very roughly, the following should be checked:

1. Development plan: is there a general planned height?
2. If not, within what framework (usually 1m) can the ground be altered completely (!) without an additional building permit?
3. Was it altered completely within the framework?
4. Was it only partially altered, i.e., worked with local excavations/fillings? If yes, these structural changes are considered independent components with possibly their own setback areas, which must each lie on their own property.
5. Along with this, possibly loss of approval eligibility in the simplified approval process, furthermore...
6. ... possible planning error of the executing architect or (in case of own initiative) of the builder.

Then of course one has to weigh ... how large is one's own impairment and how much insight does the neighbor have, how much trouble do you want to cause yourself with the neighbor? On the other hand, it is also not acceptable that he illegally shapes his garden as he likes and one has to restrict oneself structurally as a result.

Kind regards
Dirk Grafe

Why do the "angry neighbors" always have to be used as an argument for hesitation?

In the case of f-pNo and the OP, it is like this: The neighbor is an a**hole because he doesn't care about laws, the development plan, etc., nor your state of mind. Result: Although innocent, you get annoyed. The neighbor, on the other hand, is happy and shows with the whole action what he thinks of you: absolutely nothing. You don't defend yourselves against the neighbor and are unhappy, and the annoyance weighs on you, even though you are innocent.

So why not turn the situation around and take matters into your own hands?

You simply demand now that the neighbor complies with laws, the development plan, etc., and if necessary rebuilds or changes things, just like anyone else. The neighbor, who doesn't care about your state of mind anyway, is now rightly annoyed. But—and this is the most important— you have found your peace. And there are other neighbors. Such a property always has several sides and neighbors, and there are many houses with many other nice people on a street.

After such an action, war will not break out immediately; you will still be able and supposed to greet each other politely. You shouldn't expect more from a neighbor who, as mentioned, doesn't care about your well-being. I always keep my distance from such people.

Thanks first of all to everyone for the answers and suggestions.

Is it really possible to just view the neighbor's building permit like that?

We have described our problem to our house construction company and are now waiting for an answer.
Tendentially, we are not willing to agree to it because I am also afraid that a huge load will then press against our garage and consequently our house, since the garage is built directly onto the house.

I don't even need to talk to the neighbor about financial compensation, he still believes that we can share the retaining wall, as he still thinks that the city has filled it up.

To inspect the building file, you must (in NRW) prove the so-called legitimate interest; the building authority must in turn check that no data is given to third parties who have no concern with it. In the present case, in my opinion, you would have, for example, a legitimate interest in the original terrain height of the neighboring property and in the authority’s knowledge of the interim changes. What you would _not_ receive, for example, are the static calculations and detailed execution plans.

In your position, I would lodge an informal objection with the building authority against the filling of the terrain, because the terrain was obviously/conspicuously filled too high. Whether this is true, they must first verify themselves. In addition, you describe the neighbor’s demand that he forces you to correct the terrain fill that is too high.

Furthermore, you request information/check whether a setback easement is required for the neighbor’s garage – the very term "easement" will set off all alarm bells at the authority. For this purpose, you request the corresponding excerpts from the building file, if necessary via your own architect:

- Site plan for the building application of the residential house/garage with heights
- Relevant development plan including written additions

If all this should bring no result (which I find very hard to imagine), you can commission a publicly appointed surveyor of your choice in NRW to record the terrain heights with the note that he should prove/check any potentially unlawful alteration of the neighboring property. For this, the neighbor’s building applications are absolutely necessary, but I think the building authority will act on its own if the case is reported to them.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

Thanks already for the many infos. I will then report how it went.