Bought leasehold flat and now they say my dog is a nuisance

fablanta

smigsmag wrote: »

'no dog, cat, bird or other animal that may cause a nuisance' could be kept at the property.

You are both correct in that the wording was probably intended to prohibit the keeping of canines, felines, avians and nuisance animals but the wording was botched leaving the clause open to (mis)interpretation. My programmer's brain automatically expanded the clause to read (no dog/no cat/no bird/no other animal) that may cause a nuisance. Further clouding the issue is the fact it states no dog, (which could refer to an individual animal) rather than no dogs which would have reference all of dogkind m'laud :-) You have to admit that the wording would have sounded far stronger as a blanket ban had it read, no dogs, cats, birds or other animals that may cause a nuisance' could be kept at the property, but as is, it could refer to individual entities.

Dazedandconfused

I don't understand why your solicitor would just take the vendors sols word for it and not make independent enquiries. I believe my conveyancer would have checked the terms of the lease. I was given misleading info from my sellers solicitor because my seller was unreliable but it was all verified by my legal rep

When I looked at a flat for sale the lease on that stated no pets but I was advised that people did have pets and we actually knocked and queried it with one of the neighbours who told us you could write to the freeholder to seek permission (they had done this with cats) if I had decided to go ahead with that flat I would have verified with the freeholder before going ahead that my cats could move in.

Have you gone back to your solicitor and asked for advice on this issue, if the vendors solicitor has categorically stated that dogs are allowed then potentially you could pursue an action against them but this would be awkward and at the end of the day isn't going to solve the issue where you live.

Have you tried explaining your position to the management company and assure them you will clean up muddy paw prints and minimise any disturbance to other residents?

Leon_W

'no dog, cat, bird or other animal that may cause a nuisance' could be kept at the property


I read that as no dogs, cats, birds or any animal capable of causing a nuisance cannot be kept at the property.


It matters not whether the animal actual IS causing a nuisance, the fact is that it MAY. One single dog bark in the middle of the night would be a nuisance for me as I wouldn't want to hear it, and equally, a parrot squawking would not be idea of peaceful enjoyment. There is no issue of a bird making a nuisance of itself in communal areas but they have been specifically excluded because they MAY cause a noise nuisance.


You have to look at it from the other residents perspective as well. Some could have bought their property solely because of that clause safe in the knowledge that they will not be disturbed (or even a chance of being disturbed) by other peoples pets.


The fact the next door neighbour has a dog is irrelevant. If the lease specified carpeted floors for example it doesn't make it right that just because someone else has bare boards it's OK for you to do it too, this would just result in a free for all with people doing what they like.


In my opinion therefore, the dog shouldn't be there.

AndyT678

I don't think the lease wording is ambiguous. It seems clear to me that dogs, cats and birds are outright banned as is anything else that might cause nuisance.

Dog that barks "rarely" = dog that barks.

If I lived next door to you I'd probably want shot of it.

lavalamp

smigsmag wrote: »

He is a staffy. A friendly, calm, quiet staffy from a dog rescue. But people often cross the road to avoid him and shout abuse at me in the street for no reason.

I feel for you on this - I have people cross the road to avoid my staffy girl - people who know her think she is the most perfect, loveable dog, but the reputation that some people have given them is a barrier to strangers. Little Rosie is changing attitudes one person at a time, but it's an uphill struggle isn't it? Good luck with your problem - I hope it works out well for you.

propertyman

lavalamp wrote: »

, but the reputation that some people have given them is a barrier to strangers.

And their actually trying to eat people......:eek::rotfl:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lincoln-dog-attack-second-victim-3227719

lavalamp

propertyman wrote: »

And their actually trying to eat people......:eek::rotfl:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lincoln-dog-attack-second-victim-3227719

Yes, but staffys are not the only dogs that have tried to eat people are they? Irresponsible owners are the biggest cause of dog attacks.

Slinky

I deliver magazines to some blocks of flats near where I live. They are allowed to keep dogs providing they are not a nuisance. I don't have a dog so my nose isn't programmed to block out dog smells. I can smell dog in some of the hallways. I don't think it's because the dog spends any length of time in the hall, it's just the smell is leaking out from the flat when the door is opened/closed. Same as other areas I can smell smoke even though smoking isn't allowed in the common parts. It's particularly noticeable where there are small lobby areas protected by fire doors where there are 3 flat doors all exiting into a small space.

Some people have taken to putting air fresheners in these areas and it does make a difference.

System

I once lived in a flat where a neighbour had a dog.

It's antisocial to keep all but the vesy best behaved dogs in a flat in my opinion.

The constant barking, dog smell and muck everywhere was pure misery for everyone else in the building, so selfish.

If your dog leaves footprint you should be straight out there cleaning it up.

Someone who owns a dog will have no idea how smelly a doggy smell is.

tangojulie

I think it's quite clear that dogs are not allowed, regardless of their behaviour.

Either it means 'no dogs' - in which case that's it.

Or it means 'no dogs that MIGHT cause a nuisance'. Not 'that DO cause a nuisance'. Since it's in the nature of dogs that they bark and might cause a nuisance, all dogs get caught by this.

I'm really sorry but I think you'll either have to get a specific exemption, or move.