Mepa reform and third party rights

The discussion on the Mepa reform promised by the Prime Minister goes on. And that is as it should be. One hopes all suggestions are being noted and taken into serious consideration.

In the main, the discussion has focused on the unbridled tearing down of villas and so-called old buildings (some of them barely 50 years old) to make way for apartments and garage complexes, some of which are changing radically the centuries-old character of villages that had been perpetuated with the development that took place in Maltese housing between the 1950s and the 1970s.

The other bone of contention centres on the issue or otherwise of permits for construction in areas that are outside approved development zones and which, quite often, take up quite sizeable tracts of land, some of them encroaching onto the ever-decreasing space traditionally reserved for agriculture.

Little, however, has been heard of the effects that urban development is having on third parties whose premises, big or small, lie adjacent to the new developments.

Last May 15, the Department of Information said that "the government will be introducing regulations aimed at protecting third parties and third party property during construction work. These will be part of a phased implementation of regulations related to building construction over the coming months."

The statement is attributed to the Minister for Resources and Rural Affairs, George Pullicino, and was delivered at a seminar on energy efficiency organised by the Chamber of Achitects.

The minister is also quoted as saying that there is a need to create a system to ensure that laws and regulations are implemented and monitored and that their enforcement takes place in a sound and efficient manner that does not give rise to unnecessary bureaucratic measures.

The NGO Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar has now appealed to the government to ensure that Mepa intervenes in cases of damage caused to neighbouring houses and of injuries during construction works.

Mepa regulations, appended to every development permit, state: "This permit is granted saving third party rights." Mepa, however, does not itself protect third parties. It does not even insist that developers take out a third party insurance policy, even if such policies do not cover all damages one can consider. Mepa tells complaining residents to have recourse to the courts.

One hopes that Mr Pullicino's statement means that in the forthcoming reform, Mepa will be made to take an active part in this "saving" of third party rights. Its inspectors should not only be concerned with ensuring that the building or development is being carried out according to the approved plans; they should also ensure that third party rights are not being prejudiced by the developer.

Over the years there have been developments that rode roughshod over these rights. So many people in Sliema, St Julians, Balzan and other places, have been saddled with damage to their property and left in the lurch by developers. To be fair, there have been developers who have made good for such damages, even if, at times, there has been too much wrangling even over the most obvious of cases. But others have made people's lives hell throughout the demolition and construction process and have failed to reimburse those who suffered losses through their actions.

There have been too many cases of people who could have gone to court but for one reason or another did not. Among them are elderly people who have never ever crossed the threshold of the institution and are actually afraid to do so; people who have suffered relatively minor damage to their property and believe that it's not worth going to court even for some €3,000; many who have had to fork out repair money themselves in the knowledge that the developer would make their lives hell were they to take him to court; others who feel that a court remedy takes ages to come by.

The Mepa reform should see to it that its officials are satisfied that third party rights are being actually respected. If not, they should order developers to ensure that this is done, at the risk of having their building permits suspended or withdrawn. And, in my view, this should work retroactively for at least five years. Only by doing so will third parties, whose rights have been trampled upon, be afforded due and just retribution.