PPC on Residential Site - Fightback against the MA

RA_annoyed · 14 September 2017 at 4:05PM

Hi All,

Sorry for the new post but after lurking on here for a bit reading lots of threads, we (myself and some other Residents) are looking for some specific viewpoints on our situation.

To cut a long story short we have a beligerent MA who has brought a PPC on site without any consultation and refuses to be reasonable about it. The net result is that some residents have got tickets, some paid becuase they knew no better (we are helping with this), some have followed the advice here (IPC member PPC) and others have complained to the MA and the land owner.

Now we are at the point where we want to pursue the legal avenues to get the MA and land owner to act reasonably as all other reasonable avenues have proven fruitless. We have seen the LBC written for user "Hairray" but we didn't see his original lease posted there (unless we missed it) so we don't know if all the points in those letters are relevant for us, hence the new thread to ask for specific questions basis the expert on here about our lease.

I can post a redacted copy up here if needs be but in summary for now our lease has:

Particulars:
This section refers to the following particulars:
the Demised Premises (basically the flat)
the Parking Space (... edged red on the plan and numbered with the same plot number as the Demised Premises)

Meaning of Words:
"the Parking Space" - means that part of the Development referred to <in the Particulars above>
"the Parking Spaces" - means the car parking spaces shown on the plan (basically all other spaces)

The DEMISE section is specifically for the Demised Premises and all the rights set out in schedule X.

Schedule X contains "demised rights" (extracted regarding parking):
- The right for the Lessee and the tentant or occupiers of the Demised Premises ... to go and re-pass at all times and for all purposes of access to and egress from the Demised Premises only with or without vehicle (as appropriate) over and along the New Roads and Accessways ...
- The right to exclusive use of the "Parking Space" for the purpose of parking a private motor vehicle not exceeding three tonnes gross laden weight
- The right to use in common with all others entitled to a like right on a first come first served basis any parking spaces marked "VP" on the plan for the temporary parking of visitors private motor vehicles not exceeding three tonnes gross laden weight

Later on we also have:
- That the lessee paying the rent ... shall peaceably hold and enjoy the Demised Premises and the rights hereby granted during the said term without any lawful interruption from or by the Lessor or the Management Company or any person lawfully claiming under or in trust for either of them

Of course there is the standard Estate Regulation bumpf too. Its meaning is ironically:
... any rule or regulation made by the Management Company from time to time for the benefit of use and enjoyment of the Development.

and there is the clause that allows the Management Company to have the power to make and at any time vary such Estate Regulations as it may reasonably think fit for the preservation of the amenities of the Development or for the general convenience ...

Suffice to say, the scheme is flawed as we all said it would be and it hasn't solved any problems. In fact it has created - as we said it would - more problems and more animosity. The only winner out of this appears to be the PPC.

As such we need to take more stern action now and we would like to hear views as to whether - as we believe - there is a clear breach of our leases here and if so what kind of damages should we look for in our LBC to the land owner and Management Company ... any help greatly appreciated.

Timothea · 14 September 2017 at 5:20PM

It will all depend on the lease, of course. However, from the information you have provided, it appears that the lessees have primacy of contract to "hold and enjoy the Demised Premises and the rights hereby granted during the said term without any lawful interruption from or by the Lessor or the Management Company or any person lawfully claiming under or in trust for either of them."

You should realise that the management company may be in receipt of payments from the PPC for the right to "manage" parking on the property. In many cases, "manage" means to make lots of money from residents and their visitors. In other words, the management company and the PPC may be in this together.

The way to fight this is to explain to the management company in clear legal terms why these parking charges are invalid and to threaten the PPC and the management company with legal action to recover all moneys paid together with damages for trespass and data protection breaches. The management company is jointly and severally liable for the actions of its agent (the PPC) and when it realises that it could be liable for refunding all charges and thousands of pounds in damages, it may back down.

A solicitor's letter is most effective, although most solicitors are unfamiliar with private parking or data protection. However, the main arguments are around the lease, so a property solicitor should be able to draft something quickly and inexpensively. This can work if residents come together to share the costs, and the solicitor's fees will normally be recoverable if the management company backs down.

Alternatively, you could go down the do-it-yourself route. This will take a significant amount of time and effort, but there are some solicitors on this forum (not me) who may be able to provide advice.

Do check whether you or any other residents have legal insurance that covers property matters. This is often provided as an option for household insurance or through membership schemes (e.g. The Consumers' Association).

RA_annoyed · 14 September 2017 at 5:36PM

Thanks for the response, it's very interesting to read. We deliberately didn't put our conclusions in the above post (and won't for now) as we wanted to see what others thought without biasing the responses.

I think if at a minimum we find most responders agree with our PoV regarding the lease position, then we will continue on the path we are treading. We are completely up for doing the leg work ourselves as we are capable and have already done a lot of research, including going through many residential parking threads here. If we additionally get some great initial advice, a few specific pointers to send us in the right direction or people to help review our first draft LBCs then even better.

I will try and get the full redacted lease up if other posters wish to see it in its entirety before commenting.

I can see from the many threads on here that ours is not an uncommon problem, but in most cases people see off the PPC in the SCC, in our case it would be nice to give a bloody nose back to those causing the issue at source.

safarmuk · 15 September 2017 at 11:49AM

I would be inclined to agree with Timothea, based on what you have revealed you seem to have a strong case and that the MA (Management Agent) is not within their rights to do what they have done and need to listen to you. But the lease must be read in its entirety and then all the pieces joined up to form your conclusion.

There are solicitors on this site who may be able to help if you put up the full lease. I have been involved in a similar circumstance and I must warn you this is not easy, but extremely rewarding when you win and/or get the concessions you want.

Do you have a Residents Group then? I am thinking you do because you use "we".

I'll look again at your terms above later and see what I can add but hopefully others might pitch in too.

RA_annoyed · 22 September 2017 at 3:56PM

Unashamed bump for any further advice?

Coupon-mad · 22 September 2017 at 4:04PM

The right to exclusive use of the "Parking Space" for the purpose of parking a private motor vehicle

Good, you have primacy of contract. A right. And no parking charges stated.

Have you complained to your MP about this scam?

It's high time they all learned about what this rotten industry is doing to people in their own homes; at least one MP fired off a FOI request to the DVLA (maybe the courts service, I can't recall?) to find out how many of his constituents were affected at a residential site where there is a marauding PPC suing people for parking at their own homes.

Keep up the fight and publicity and get your MP on board.

RA_annoyed · 27 September 2017 at 3:20PM

Hi Coupon-Mad - thanks for the reply.

Good, you have primacy of contract. A right. And no parking charges stated.

This is what we think too. So do you think a breach of the lease has occurred?

at least one MP fired off a FOI request to the DVLA (maybe the courts service, I can't recall?) to find out how many of his constituents were affected at a residential site where there is a marauding PPC suing people for parking at their own homes.

How did the MP do this, by asking for the number of DVLA searches or Court Cases where the service address was that of the estate where the PPC was operating?

We are keeping up the fight and bumping this again for any more good advice (especially opinions on the BoL question and what remedies could be sought).

Coupon-mad · 27 September 2017 at 10:38PM

I don't see it as a breach of the lease because they will say they've not attempted to vary the lease, and that their 'contract' stands alone.

But you would argue they've offered nothing of value that could represent consideration (as a primary element of any contractual agreement) because you had the 'exclusive' right to park already. And in fact, their harassing demands sent to you for simply parking at your own home location is unwarranted interference with your peaceful enjoyment, and distressing in the extreme, etc.

How did the MP do this, by asking for the number of DVLA searches or Court Cases where the service address was that of the estate where the PPC was operating?

I must admit I only read it once somewhere and can't recall the details.

RA_annoyed · 28 September 2017 at 9:41AM

I don't see it as a breach of the lease because they will say they've not attempted to vary the lease, and that their 'contract' stands alone.

Hmmm, well if the lease says one thing and the agents of the freeholder are doing something else, then surely the agents are causing a breach of the lease on behalf of the freeholder.

I don't see how the freeholder can wash their hands of their agents behaviour (once they have been made aware) and therefore we believe unless the freeholder acts they are liable ...

Agree entirely with your second point. Absolutely no consideration is flowing from the car parking company.

nosferatu1001 · 28 September 2017 at 10:08AM

Interference with the lease, by encroaching on peaceful enjoyment, is a breach of the lease by the MA via their agents. If the MA are acting on behalf of the freeholder, the free holder is also breaching the lease.

safarmuk · 28 September 2017 at 11:02AM

Interference with the lease, by encroaching on peaceful enjoyment, is a breach of the lease by the MA via their agents. If the MA are acting on behalf of the freeholder, the free holder is also breaching the lease.

Agree, I have been looking into this a bit, time permitting, and on other threads there is also useful information from LOC123, but yes, if the situation is the PPC is engaged by the MA and the MA is instructed by the FH then ultimately anything the PPC does wrong - via the law of agency (can't remember the exact words) - flows back to the FH especially if it is a breach of lease. That is my understanding.

The key I think you are looking for is to understand what is the actual "breach of lease". Is it a breach of your leasehold rights (e.g. the specific terms mentioned above) or is it a breach of your quiet enjoyment and interference with such (e.g. by way of interfering with the leasehold right specific terms mentioned above).

PPC on Residential Site - Fightback against the MA

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free