What would you do ?

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by DaFace

My point is that escalating disputes rarely works out the way you hope it will. Honestly, to answer the actual question in the OP, I probably would do nothing and just accept that I'm responsible for something my neighbor is benefitting from.

It sucks that it's not "fair," but it's not like that's unheard of. I own the fence that gives my neighbors some extra privacy. They own the tree that shades my yard. I don't expect them to chip in for the fence when the time comes, and they don't expect me to pay for their tree to get pruned.

I'm just hoping we get updates on how this turns out. Should be riveting drama.

I mean, that's absurd.

Shared fences are a clearly socially acceptable mutually beneficial structure. There really isn't any additional wear & tear to a fence whether it's shared or not. In some states there are statutes relative to shared maintenance on a shared fence & in some it falls on the owner. In rare instances (IDR where but I have worked there) there are areas where you will commonly see them constructed side by side with each neighbor responsible for the one he/she owns. The law is settled here but it doesn't transfer to other structures on the property or oopsy surprises like this.

That can't be said here in a situation where there's twice as much outflow contributing to incremental w/t on the OP's drain line. Not to mention the fact that ITT there's abundant evidence from what the city is apparently telling this dude in regards to this issue in that he is not only not stuck but can require the neighbor run his own line.

I did like your suggestion to approach the dude in a friendly manner & give him time to come up with the $ to construct his own drain line. My only addendum to that would be to send a certified letter with a return receipt confirming the conversation & timeline. & I also agree that escalation typically never works out & should be avoided to the extent its possible.

Nothing to do with your commentary but OP is getting run through the wringer ITT unnecessarily IMO. It's clear once details were provided he acted reasonably with respect to the dogs.