Eviction notice in the pipeline

HB58

caseyann wrote: »

Because the parking space with the shed is directly below the affected floor.

Thanks for clarifying that.

caseyann

Because the parking space with the shed is directly below the affected floor.

caseyann

This is the only flat in the development - the others are all two storey. Just imagine a mews type development where this flat instead of having a downstairs living area has an allocated parking space underneath. It would not take much to put a door on it and call it a garage.
Interestingly four out of the seven dwellings in the development are currently vacant and to let or for sale.

dancingfairy

It is up to the freeholders of the land. It appears the landlord has some type of flying freehold over the carpark but whether he has any ownership of the land/development, who knows.
The main crux of the problem appears to be the damp damaging the mould and belongings and attention should be given to rectifying these. Your daughter should be down at Environmental Health as soon as they open on Monday and see someone and explain it is urgent. She can email them copies of photos as well. If it is as bad as you say it is then the landlord may be forced to do the works or to provide alternative accomodation (At his cost), although this can't guarantee that he won't serve notice at the nearest opportunity.
df

moromir

caseyann wrote:

~The flat is not leasehold - it is freehold and owned by the landlord.

My bolding - This is extremely unlikely. Very very few flat properties are freehold in the true sense due to their very nature.

I suspect you may be getting confused as there is a much more common situation where the flat owner may own 'the freehold' or own a share of 'the freehold'.

Owning the freehold does not end the Head Lease.


I see that you have now described the property in more detail, and it appears to be some form of coach house. Is the parking space underneath allocated to this property alone? What does the land registry show? You'll normally find areas like this hatched out and an explanatory note attached about whether it forms part of the amenity lands.

If it is a new development, you may well find there are 'Head Lease' type covenants which the owner must abide by and may include only using certain areas for certain purposes - i.e. car parking spaces for parking a car.

The tenant may also be running foul of planning regulations. By creating a four walled structure inside a structure only intended to have 2 or 3 walls - there may be breaches of fire safety regulations which will specify building materials and things like access.

caseyann

Believe me this is freehold. This area of the country seems to have a prevalence of freehold flats for some reason and we have owned several as landlords.
We did look into purchasing the flat originally so are aware of all the details of ownership. We are also fully aware of regulations regarding planning, building regulations and fire requirements and this is not an issue. We obviously became aware of the issues regarding the mould when we had a survey carried out and decided that it was too much of a problem to tackle, even though the problems then were not as great as they are now.
Yes, the area underneath is allocated to this property alone and currently there are two cars and a shed on it.

darren_clarke

she doesn't have to leave a property with a court order telling her she has to, any citizans advice or even the council will tell you that

darren_clarke

re the problem might be that the car park is for car parking only and the shed, might need permission to be put there

moromir

caseyann wrote:

We are also fully aware of regulations regarding planning, building regulations and fire requirements and this is not an issue.

*head scratch*

But theres now a four sided flammable structure in place of what should be a fire proof (brick?) open three sided structure?

This flammable structure is underneath a dwelling that has passed its building regulations inspection on the basis that there is a three sided open structure underneath it....

If the building inspector got a call I'm sure he'd have plenty to say.

You'd have to jump through hoops to even be allowed to put a regular garage door on a three sided structure intended to be open plan let alone change the purpose for which planning consent was granted.

All of this is irrelevent of course since the landlord clearly doesn't want it there therefore your friend's options appear to be remove the structure or look for somewhere else to live?

adonis

paddedjohn wrote: »

Its an allocated car parking space, not a shed space. Be sensible.

So get one of these and you are sorted,

plenty of wood on this as well.

If the main worry is fire risk get a metal shed.