In January the wall between the higher community centre and my lower property collapsed into my garden. I informed both the mairie and my insurance company and last week an assessor arrived with the maire and her colleague. After much discussion and exchanging of photographs it was decided that the responsibility was mine but that the insurance company would pay. The wall is a very old stone and earth one and there is evidence that there was once a building attached to it - you can see the outline of the roof and amongst the stones is a piece of galvanised zinc that would have been part of it. The insurance company have now reneged on their agreement. The maire told me not to go near the wall as it is dangerous (which is obvious). However, there is no way that I could ever afford to have it rebuilt and, apart from shifting the stones one by one (Iâm 73 and not particularly strong) I donât know what else I can do. Does anyone know what the legal implications are, please?
Sorry to hear that, did you have anything in writing from the insurance saying they would cover it even if they reneged later?
Other than the advice to avoid the remnants of the wall for reasons of safety is the Mairie aware of the fact that the insurance has changed its mind and that you canât afford the repairs?
Thank you and no - everything was done on the assessorâs laptop including an amount of âŹ1,600. He seemed quite positive. I expected the paperwork in the post but received a simple letter stating otherwise today.
Not yet. Our lovely maire died a few weeks ago and I wasnât aware that she was the new one. I donât think she was impressed!
Well, on face value, either your insurance or the community centreâs is liable (or as happened to me around five years ago the insurance companies went 50/50 on a âŹ20k bill to rebuild a party wall that ivy had dragged down). Itâs not you or the community centreâs problem, the insurance companies should, less any excessâs, sort out the matter.
What did the rejection letter say?
After the expert having confirmed that they would pay out, this:
'Nous ne pouvons pas y répondre favorablement.
En effet, votre contrat ne prĂ©voit pas la prise en charge des dommages nâĂ©tant pas le rĂ©sultat dâune destruction accidentelle, soudaine et fortuite.
Lâexpert nous prĂ©cise en effet : 'La cause du sinistre rĂ©sulte dâune carence dâentretien des jointoiements du mur en pierre, dont les eaux se sont infiltrĂ©es Ă lâintĂ©rieur du mur, provoquant une dĂ©stabilisation des liants en terre, qui a conduit Ă lâeffondrement constatĂ©.â
I bought it three and a half years ago from a couple who had renovated the interior between 2017-19. It had previously stood empty for 12 years.
Whose responsibility is the wall, technically?
According to the mairie, mine - but Iâve no evidence to that effect. Itâs a retaining wall and behind it is the car park that belongs to the community centre, the centre being to the right of the wall and partly attached; both are on the higher ground. The side of the wall belonging to the community is about 1 metre high whereas on my side it is about 3 metres. Iâve often wondered if the car park was built on top of another house or other buildings.
Your notaire would be able to confirm is responsibility to maintain theirs or yours or 50/50.
Also their text is like UK exclusion for âgradually operating causeâ would be. But ISTR thereâs sometimes a separate public liability coverage clause for land and buildings in UK policies. Negligence might (or might not) mean that if such coverage is there in French policy it might not work. But itâs quite possible no one would have noticed any deterioration in the wall so not negligent.
Have you gpne through the insurance policy with a fine toothcomb? I would.
What would happen if the wall was not repaired? If the car parkâs ground collapsed and cars and possibly people 
fell into your garden could you accuse them of trespass ? If so Iâm wondering if when youâve worked out your position would it be wise to serve any written mise en demeure with avis de rĂ©ception notice now on mairie and any other party with an interest in the adjacent land.
Why not email or visit your notaire with photos, insurance contract and correspondence and ask?
Yes, itâs occurred to me that after one of the all night discos in the community centre that someone a little inebriated might fall into my garden (Iâm always a bit apprehensive about pulling the curtains back on a Sunday morning in case thereâs a cadaver stretched out on the stones). I will visit the notaire as you suggest but I will also challenge the response given that it contradicts the original statement.
Sorry but that made me laugh and I am sure you wonât be offended because the way you wrote it tells me that you recognised the black humour of it yourself.
Whether I am right about that or not I do sympathise. I am not an expert but to me it seems that it is a retaining wall, there to support the commune land above yours and, as a result for whatever reason, it has failed to fulfill its purpose. Friends of ours had just such a wall supporting next doorâs garden, the house of which was uninhabited. It was finally, after a year, rebuilt by a local builder and, as the next door landlord was absent or deceased, I think our friends paid themselves, but it wouldnât have been such an expensive job as yours appears to be. Good advice though, next stop the Notaire. 
Nice little get out clause there by the insurance. If you disagree with the finding, you can always take it to the mĂ©diateur de lâassurance.
If there is really a danger of further collapse of the wall/car-park surface etc., or of someone falling, surely the adjacent property owner would be responsible for making the edge of their boundary safe by means of a barrier of some sort?
Well, youâd think so. In fact, when it first fell I created a notice to print out and place on their side of the wall but then my printer packed up! I canât access it from my side but now that the rain has stopped Iâll walk round and see if thereâs anything in place as the party season will begin soon. Iâve realised this morning that the top part is mortared with cement whereas the lower two thirds, on my side, is earth, sand and lime (and stable).
A notice stuck on the wall wonât have the same strength as any relevant mise en demeure sent with avis de rĂ©ception, if notaire thinks relevant to send one, based on how things seem to work in France. Iâd ask notaire about both.
If their land is a above yours I am wondering if there is a competent type of professional in France, as a surveyor might be in England, who would certify that their land is draining onto yours and the wall, which has now been found to have weakened its construction and the consequent damage caused by this has now been discovered.
Hence your formal mise en demeure with ADR to each party with an interest in the land, to 1. repair the damage AND 2. perform such works on their land to avoid a recurrence.
No idea if this approach legally works in France, I"d want to know as Iâd consider it in England.
Iâd not refer to it as âmyâ wall but âtheâ wall, as well.
Surely a retaining wall is the responsibility of the owners of the property being retained?
If the disco or Salle de fĂȘte is private or public owned and used for the public itâs their responsibility to fence off any danger, any cadavers they will be liable for.
I think that is what I said, didnât I? It is certainly what I meant. 
Hello, Ms JHH - Time to pull a few threads together! I have lived in France for 24 years now; and experienced just such a âboundary disputeâ. Because that is all that it is.
There are no such thing as âDeedsâ in France; no specific record for a property. The land records that were held prior to the Revolution mostly all got burned - for obvious reasons.
There is, therefore, a centuries-old tradition regarding walls and ditches.
If a wall exists to support the land above it - it does not matter whether or not it has a building on it - the wall is, therefore, the responsibility of the owner of that land. Thatâs all that there is to it. The only exception is if your purchase document (the Acte de Vente) specifically states and identifies otherwise.
You are lucky - from what you say, the land above, and itâs retaining wall is owned by the State (aka âthe communeâ). It therefore has nothing to do with your insurance companyâs liability. The state must pay.
Hopefully the notaire that you purchased your property through will be prepared to send a formal letter to the Mairie on your behalf. It should make it clear that any damage and cost that you entail as a consequence for their failure to maintain the wall will fall upon them, including legal costs.
Once the new maire knows that you arenât a dumb Brit, this should do the trick. Her function, donât forget, is to limit commune expenditure. But, not at your expense!
The next step, incidentally, if the new maire doesnât get it, is to instruct an avocat - to threaten legal proceedings against the commune. This will cost a few hundred euros to start with. But tread carefully - the courts in France do not normally award costs in favour of a successful applicant.
A photo or two would help. I donât understand the âbuilding attached to itâ, and what that might entail . . . .