Tenants rights in regards to building work starting on the premises

BattyMatty

Hi there,

A bit of a hypothetical question here so that we can prepare adequately for the worst if it comes around...

Myself and 5 others entered into a 1 year AST in August 2010 (no break clause) for a lovely house (deposit protected, we have the LL's address). It includes a massive off road driveway (space for 6 cars) and a large back garden, very unusual for the area. When we moved in, the LA told us the garden and drive aren't included in the tenancy, but they are not excluded in the TA and are included in our inventory, so we're using them (I'm assuming this is a valid move...). Our stay has been happy and uneventful to date. We have signed a brand new TA for next year (a new AST, 1 year in duration, no break clause), where he increased the rent by 16 squid per head.

However, in the last few weeks, a surveyor and architect have been to visit. This made us slightly curious, and so we looked up planning permission applications. Sure enough, an application was granted in August 2009 to build an entire new property over the large driveway and garden.

The planning permission is granted to our property (call it No.5). Also on the council planning website, the property map shows the boundaries of No.5 include the driveway and garden. Interestingly, there is no No.3, only No.1 next door to us, so perhaps they merged at some point? Either way, the council defines the boundaries of No.5 to include the driveway and garden. The new property planning permission states that the new property would become No.3.

We are now slightly worried that the LL is going to start building works while we still live here, either this year or next. This would abolish both our garden and remove all of our parking space, annoying as there are currently 4 cars parked... Without our permission, would he be entitled to do this building work? If our TA (both this current one and our new one) says we are entitled to live at No.5, the inventory includes the driveway and the garden, and the council lists the boundaries of No.5 as including these, then can we say "no thank you" and let him wait until we move out in 2012?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated, and if anyone needs any clarification, let me know and I'll try to make things clearer! This is currently hypothetical, we've sent him an email asking him what his plans are, and he may well say he's waiting until we move out in 2012.

Matt

G_M

Depends how your AST describes the property. If the AST simply says you are renting number 5, then that is what you are entitled to occupy! Download the Title Plan for number 5 from the Land Registry (£4). You are entitled to 'quiet enjoyment' of the (entire!) property. That is not a noise-related comment (ie building work noise) it is a legal way of saying you should not be disturbed in your occupation of the property. You have the right to say who has access to the property (including the garden, land, drive etc), when, and why.

So unless your AST specifically excludes part of the property, you could get a court injunction to stop any building work on the property you have rented.

However, I would advise before doing this trying to reach an amicable agreement. If the owner really wants to build, how about agreeing for a discount off your rent, as compensation for the lost land and/or noise?

edit: Just re-read:

When we moved in, the LA told us the garden and drive aren't included in the tenancy, but they are not excluded in the TA and are included in our inventory

Told you how? Anything written?
Garden and drive in the inventory? Unusual but pretty conclusive!

BattyMatty

They didn't give us anything in writing when we moved in saying they weren't included. They have since emailed us to say that the driveway is not included in the tenancy, but we have not signed anything saying we agree with this, and this was 2 months into the tenancy. Does that matter? I'm guessing it counts for nothing as it's not in the original agreement. It's not in the new one either.

We thought the inventory was strange too, but it's really thorough. The driveway condition is listed as "cracks throughout the concrete with green plant-life growing through". The garden gets an equally thorough treatment.

Also I've attached the Title Plan (street names blanked out) showing the property. The driveway is shaded in yellow, the garden in pink and blue. The yellow corresponds with his planning permission. The blue, orange and pink, I'm not sure about. Either way, I'm assuming the solid red lines define No.5. The tenancy agreement lists the premises as "No.5 X Street". That's it. No exclusions. Does that reinforce what you think?

Title Plan Link

DVardysShadow

BattyMatty wrote: »

Also I've attached the Title Plan (street names blanked out) showing the property. The driveway is shaded in yellow, the garden in pink and blue. The yellow corresponds with his planning permission. The blue, orange and pink, I'm not sure about. Either way, I'm assuming the solid red lines define No.5. The tenancy agreement lists the premises as "No.5 X Street". That's it. No exclusions. Does that reinforce what you think?

Pls put this plan on a hosting site and include a link. The delete it from your post.
As it is, I don't think many people will want to scroll left and right to read the thread.

BattyMatty

Sorry, fixed, didn't think it would come out like that.

DVardysShadow

BattyMatty wrote: »

They didn't give us anything in writing when we moved in saying they weren't included. They have since emailed us to say that the driveway is not included in the tenancy, but we have not signed anything saying we agree with this, and this was 2 months into the tenancy. Does that matter? I'm guessing it counts for nothing as it's not in the original agreement. It's not in the new one either

The email counts for nothing against your current tenancy. But if you have signed up for a new tenancy from Aug 2011, then you enter a rather grey world of uncertainty, I fear.

In your position, I would be reading the new AST and comparing to the old to see to what extent the one continues from the other - and writing to insist on your understanding that the ground in question is included.

I rather fear that you are being duped into a tenancy on a building site where the ground in question will be taken from you

G_M

I don't really share DVardyshadow's uncertainty.

The email has no contractual standing. It was sent unilaterally 2 months after the contract was signed, so unless you agreed to an amendment of the original contract, the email is meaningless.

Having discounted the email, we then come to thw contract renewal. This has to be read in the same way as the original contract. If, like the original, it simply refers to 'number 5' then once again, that is what you are renting under the contract. An email sent 10 months earlier, which in any event had no contractual significance at the time, is once again meaningless.

So unless the renewed contract which you signed has some exclusion written into it, I see no uncertainty. At least in law.

In terms of diplomacy, relationship-management etc, I refer to my earlier post - try to reach an amicable agreement, but from a position where you know your fall-back legal rights.

edit: ps. the fact that the inventory says "The driveway condition is listed as "cracks throughout the concrete with green plant-life growing through". " seems further confirmation, if any were needed. Any item listed on the inventory is clearly included in the tenancy!

BattyMatty

Thanks for that. To clarify further on two points:

1) The new AST is identical in wording to the original. It is simply a new AST because they didn't want it to convert into a monthly rolling one. Everything else is identical, including their definition of the premises as No. 5.

2) The email wasn't completely unilateral. Basically, because we were worried about what they had said when we moved in, we sent them an email asking about the garden and drive way. They replied saying that they are not included in the tenancy but that they would "allow" us to use the garden. We then read over the TA, decided that was false, and started using the driveway. Basically we haven't accepted that amendment to the contract in any way, but we haven't explicitly said that we disagree with it either. Problem? I would assume the law would only support a signed TA and any amendments would have to be signed / explicitly agreed to?

DVardysShadow

G_M wrote: »

I don't really share DVardyshadow's uncertainty.

The email has no contractual standing. It was sent unilaterally 2 months after the contract was signed, so unless you agreed to an amendment of the original contract, the email is meaningless.

Having discounted the email, we then come to thw contract renewal. This has to be read in the same way as the original contract. If, like the original, it simply refers to 'number 5' then once again, that is what you are renting under the contract. An email sent 10 months earlier, which in any event had no contractual significance at the time, is once again meaningless.

So unless the renewed contract which you signed has some exclusion written into it, I see no uncertainty. At least in law.

It was for this reason that I suggested reading the old and the new contract. I agree that the email can be discounted from the current contract.

Although I would agree that [unless the new contract has some explicit weasel words]

• it would seem that the rented property remains intact
• the earlier email would be of no consequence
• there is no uncertainty in law

I fear that in the minds of the Agent and the Landlord, the certainty might be completely the other way. To the point where it might have to go to law to prove that there is no uncertainty at law.

It is for that reason that I suggest writing now to insist on what is included in the tenancy, to flush out the Landlord and the Agent. If they are trying to use smoke and mirrors to hide their intent to take back the driveway, then a letter now will put put a spoke in their plans and maybe allow the contract to be terminated as frustrated, rather than being running sore for the whole of the next year.

sonastin

I'm a little bit confused about the dates:

BattyMatty wrote: »

Myself and 5 others entered into a 1 year AST in August 2010 ...

...We have signed a brand new TA for next year (a new AST, 1 year in duration, no break clause), where he increased the rent by 16 squid per head...

... an application was granted in August 2009 to build an entire new property over the large driveway and garden...

...he may well say he's waiting until we move out in 2012.

Even though your current AST term doesn't end for another 7 months, you've already signed a renewal - does this start from now or from August 2011 at the expiry of the existing AST?

Based on the fact that PP was granted 12 months before the tenancy, it looks to me like the LL applied for PP but couldn't fund the work yet so decided to rent the property out to make a bit of money. LA may be hedging the LL's bets by telling you that you can't use the garden and drive in case the LL finds himself ready to start work but they failed to see it through by properly excluding the areas from the tenancy agreements.

It doesn't necessarily mean that the LL is planning on starting work while you are still resident but it does sort of suggest that you might not be able to rent the whole place in the long term.

BattyMatty

It's a student let, so they force us to renew really early or lose the house to another group of students. It's a bummer, but it's how it works in city...

Our current AST is a 12 month one running from August 2010 until August 2011.

The new AST covers August 2011 until August 2012, starting on the expiry of our current AST. Signing a new one meant that the LA got another signing on fee (75 pounds per head).

We don't need the house past August 2012 - we're currently medical students, and we graduate in July 2012, and so will be moving away after that. We'd just like to get through our finals without major building works going on within the premises.