The Mamos had a feeling the large-scale construction project taking place next door could damage their property but they were not quite expecting the collapse of a sizeable chunk of rock adjacent to their pool area.

Workers noticed something was amiss on Thursday when a developer called the Mamos’ architect to alert him there were some problems with the wall dividing the two properties.

“It’s nothing urgent, he told my architect before setting an appointment for Monday,” Rowena Mamo told The Sunday Times. The following day came the surprise.

“My son Marcus was the first to spot the hole on Friday morning, he came running in to alert me... they didn’t even tell us that it may be unsafe to be near the pool,” she said.

The high buttressing wall had given way, pulling down with it a sizeable chunk of the Mamos’ poolside. Practically, half of the pool area is now unsafe as new cracks continue to surface.

The problem now is with the reconstruction, which will entail major surgery to the pool area. However, the accident, Ms Mamo points out, could have had worse consequences.

“Just last week my boys were having a party here with friends, everyone jumping around the pool. What would have happened had the damage been done before this party?” Mrs Mamo asked.

The neighbours had been complaining about the scale of the development for months but nobody took any notice.

“This is greed, just greed. It would have been obvious to anyone after a site visit that allowing someone to develop so close to neighbouring properties on what is essentially a stretch of soil (the area is a former quarry filled with soil and rubble) would create these sorts of problems.”

Ms Mamo is now in touch with the developer to have the damage repaired but is keen to raise awareness about the case to call for more regulation in the field.

“I think some sort of action needs to be taken.”

The problem with incidents of this nature is that they fall under no authority, other than the courts. The planning authority has no remit over the works and the only remedy for someone who faces this sort of problem is to find a solution with the developer or go to court.

Environmental pressure group Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar, which has highlighted this issue in recent years, insists responsibility should be handed over to the planning authority, along with more funding.

“Such incidents occur more often than the public imagines and will continue to happen until the law changes to empower Mepa to ensure the safety of residents and their property,” FAA spokesman Astrid Vella said.

“Mepa needs legal tools and funding for more inspections to ensure that residents are safe in their own homes. Telling worried neighbours of construction sites that in case of damage they can go to court is simply not acceptable.”

However, Malta Developers Association president Michael Falzon and Building Industry Consultative Committee chair-man Ċensu Galea appear sceptical about its feasibility.

“The reality right now is that the law already places the responsibility on architects and developers, and the responsibility is quite onerous,” said Mr Falzon, who is an architect and columnist.

He argued that it would be very difficult to completely avoid accidents in this line. “Accidents happen and they will continue to happen”.

However, he conceded that more regulation and possibly monitoring could help improve the situation.

“We welcome (that)... but the problem with monitoring it is that it’s a monumental task,” Mr Falzon insisted. Parliament is currently in the final stages of approving the Building Regulations Act.

These are a series of regulations proposed by the BICC, which are meant to empower people living next to land being developed.

However, Mr Galea warns against expecting too much from the regulations.

The law should streamline the situation and give third parties more rights and greater access to information (a developer has to show a works plan to a neighbour before starting a project); however, there will always be situations that go wrong.