Breach of leasehold terms - babies

movilogo

I am appalled how some people look down having children (not talking of those who raises their kids with tax payers' assistance). A baby does automatically mean noisy neighbor. Some babies are very quiet.

Someone told me UK is one of the most un-baby friendly countries in the Europe. Here people buy 2-seater cars, willing to pay more for a baby-free environment etc. etc.

Same people then complain when government raises retirement age.

Peater

movilogo wrote: »

I am appalled how some people look down having children (not talking of those who raises their kids with tax payers' assistance). A baby does automatically mean noisy neighbor. Some babies are very quiet.

True. Some are. But in the instance of them not being quiet i don't think it's fair on neighbours, just as playing loud music etc is unnacceptable.

movilogo wrote: »

Someone told me UK is one of the most un-baby friendly countries in the Europe. Here people buy 2-seater cars, willing to pay more for a baby-free environment etc. etc.

And your point is? Having a baby is a choice, not a god-given right.

movilogo wrote: »

Same people then complain when government raises retirement age.

Massive digression, but i'll bite. Raising the retirment age is due to the government trying to reduce it's liability, nothing to do with babies. The country is massively overpopulated as it is, more babies is infact going to increase the problem.

rentergirl

You need legal advice. The usual thing is 'the state approves of procreation' ie I suspect that such a clause is unenforceable. You also need to talk to the tenants: they will soon tire of angry people tell them to quieten their baby.

jee

[QUOTE


Massive digression, but i'll bite. Raising the retirment age is due to the government trying to reduce it's liability, nothing to do with babies. The country is massively overpopulated as it is, more babies is infact going to increase the problem.[/QUOTE]

The country is not "massively over populated" and we need these babies to work to support our pensions when we retire.

OP I wouldn't do anything until the baby is born and the couple continue to live in the flat. And I would only bring it up if you, and other residents, can hear the baby.
You'll just make yourself incredibly unpopular otherwise.

propertyman

Peater wrote: »

Massive digression, but i'll bite. Raising the retirment age is due to the government trying to reduce it's liability, nothing to do with babies. The country is massively overpopulated as it is, more babies is infact going to increase the problem.

Yes in the first 2 points but no to the middle one; it has everything to do with babies.

Social security is a Ponzi scheme it relies on the next set of contributors to pay those drawing from it.

That people are not only living longer and expecting more, but that the new contributors are far fewer in number relative to those claiming and the period over which they are claiming.

The scale of which is not going to be dented with a 2 year hike or workfare, or DLA cuts, or being tough on scrounges or single "muvvers" this is essentially the equivalent of cutting out or scaling back on luxury items in the weekly shop to keep under the overdraft limit.

pinkteapot

propertyman wrote: »

The no children bit is just laughable.

If you were given advice that this was enforceable, one word - sue.

Yes, it doesn't even say "no children". It says no children and then says that if children do live there then they mustn't cause a nuisance. So it even contradicts itself.

elvis86

movilogo wrote: »

I am appalled how some people look down having children (not talking of those who raises their kids with tax payers' assistance). A baby does automatically mean noisy neighbor. Some babies are very quiet.

Someone told me UK is one of the most un-baby friendly countries in the Europe. Here people buy 2-seater cars, willing to pay more for a baby-free environment etc. etc.

Same people then complain when government raises retirement age.

I hardly think that older people choosing (and paying a premium) to live in a child-free space with olther older people makes them evil child-hating monsters.

I'm not keen on kids in the room when I have s3x, I thought that made me rather sensible, or do I hate kids too??

And as for the car comment, what's the problem with someone buying a 2-seater car..? Unless they do have kids and pop them on a roof-rack, surely it's their business?!

john_white

elvis86 wrote: »

I hardly think that older people choosing (and paying a premium) to live in a child-free space with olther older people makes them evil child-hating monsters.

I'm not keen on kids in the room when I have s3x, I thought that made me rather sensible, or do I hate kids too??

And as for the car comment, what's the problem with someone buying a 2-seater car..? Unless they do have kids and pop them on a roof-rack, surely it's their business?!

Why would you have s3x in the same room as children, rather wierd.

elvis86

john_white wrote: »

Why would you have s3x in the same room as children, rather wierd.

I was making the point that choosing not to have kids around doesn't mean that you hate them, sometimes it's perfectly acceptable.

Just because someone chooses an over 55s development, or a Warner hotel break, or a child-free wedding, doesn't make them the child catcher.

tired_dad

Don't think you will get anywhere. People are entitled to have children and live a family life. It is a basic human right.

If you live near a couple of childbearing age, this is what happens. Its natural. Its what your parents went through with you.

I would think your options are to carry on or move.