CPM Penalty Ticket Assistance Required

Yes I spent time on it with that in mind. It will need to be adapted according to the specific clauses in the lease, but it's a start for people trying to draft their own.
About to do the one to the PPC which will be shorter because it won't have all the lease detail in it

Fruitcake wrote: »

It needs proof reading first before issuing. There are a few typos including "cannot not", (but I can't remember where ferzackerly it was.):o

There was also a 'hand' instead of 'had'.

Great piece of work LoC. TD has kindly said he'll look at it to see if he can improve it. :rotfl:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=72566357#post72566357
Post #12

Obviously leases will vary in precise terms/wording, but these provisions will be broadly similar between different leases.


You have to look to see:


1. Is there a power to add further rules/regulations?


2. What is the exact wording of that power?


3. Is it defined in the definitions clause?


4. If not specifically defined, is there anything else in the wording or in other definitions that helps? for instance, in this lease there is the power to add "regulations" but this is not defined. The only defined "regulations" are regs which are set by the Landowner and the MC respectively, and these are generally prohibitions on doing things and none of them relate to the use of the parking space (there are some that relate to general parking on the estate) - look to see if you can say that the way these regs are drafted and defined means that .


5. Is there anything else in the clause that limits the regulations that can be introduced - in hairray's case there is the quiet enjoyment covenant - the Landowner's power to introduce regulations is not specifically cross-referred to that but that is because it doesn't need to be because it is the landowner already has that obligation, but there is specific wording saying the MC's power must not be exercised in a way which conflicts with the quiet enjoyment covenant.

6. Does the clause say what parts of the estate/flats these new regulations can apply to? In this lease it does say this, and hairray can use that definition to argue that any new regs cannot apply to his parking space, but only to the communal parking areas which exist.

7. Even where the lease grants the power, does it extend to imposing upon a leaseholder (and therefore also his tenant) a contractual relationship with a third party? So if it can be argued that there is the power to introduce a permit system, is there the power to impose a contract with a PPC which allows it to ticket you and pursue you for breach of contract? Very unlikely.

8. Again, even where the lease grants this power, does it give the Landowner/MC the power to make a specific charge for failure to comply with the new rule/regulation which is separate to the ground rent, service charge and any defined payment to the MC? Very unlikely - the only power to charge leaseholders anything at all will probably be in the Ground rent/service charge provisions.

9. So logically, even if the power exists, and even if it applies to the parking space, it is probably limited to imposing a permit system and does not extend to creating a third party contract nor to empowering charges to be issued against individual leaseholders for failure to comply.

Thanks to CM for pointing this thread out to me via my own ongoing saga with managing agents and PPC's (http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5015782).

Thank you Loc for your time and effort to compile the letters, which I'm sure will be of great use to myself and others.