Move to allow parking only for owner occupiers in a flat block

varghesejim

Hello,

I own a flat in a block of flats. All flat owners are equal shareholders of the blaock(via a residents association). The flat is rented out.

Today I received a voting form to vote to allow only owner occupiers to park in the communal parking within the premises.

I think it is very unfair on the people who are renting in the block. This makes the community two tier where the owner occupiers have certain extra rights in the communal area compared to the renters.

Several questions I have

1)Legally is it valid for a residents association to vote to restrict communal area to favour owner occupiers?

2)What exactly are the legal powers of a residents association which owns the freehold when it comes to rights of the residents in a flat block? It is not right by voting the residents can take away the rights of certain people in the block?

I think most of the occupiers in the block are owners. If by voting among shareholders owner-occupiers can take away some of the renters rights, it will lead to more restrictions I am afraid

By the way I don't think practically the renters will have any issues as the road next to the block have enough free parking(which most of the residents use anyway). It is the principle it is bugging me

Umkomaas

Your questions are probably best addressed by a solicitor as they are of a legal nature and might have a fundamental impact on how you deal with this.

Half_way

To start with you should check your lease/freehold etc, does the property have a designated space in the car park, or is it truly communal, on a first come first get basis?


Secondly, how are they looking at enforcing a restriction? at a guess someone on the resident association may have been tempted by a private parking company, possibly offering a so called simple self ticketing operation which could offer a bonus payment for each ticket issued by the local busybody.
If this is the case then it should be resisted.


the Yes/No question does not answer the biggest question of How will they will do it? what's the residents association proposing to do?
its important that you find that bit of information out

NeilCr

I don't normally do this but there is a similar thread running on the housing forum here

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5862209/parking-only-for-owner-occupiers-in-flat-block-unfair

which contains more information.

It was suggested to the OP that he posted here, too.

varghesejim

Half_way wrote: »

To start with you should check your lease/freehold etc, does the property have a designated space in the car park, or is it truly communal, on a first come first get basis?


Secondly, how are they looking at enforcing a restriction? at a guess someone on resident association may have been tempted by a private parking company, possibly offering a so called simple self ticketing operation which could offer a bonus payment for each ticket issued by the local busybody.
If this is the case then it should be resisted.


the Yes/No question does not answer the biggest question of How will they will do it? what's the residents association proposing to do?
its important that you find that bit of information out

No designated space in the lease. It is first come first serve

I don't know how they are going to do this. I received an email asking to vote as below

Exclusive parking for owner occupiers yes/ no

Half_way

do you have any representation on whatever committee is discussing this?
who put the proposal forward for a vote?
you should be able to ask for a copy of the minutes from the meeting.
As you appear to have very little information, my instinct would be so let the status quo stand, until details on how such a scheme would work.
Also add its a communal area there could be issues in restricting is use to certain residents, who may have a pre existing right to use its as is

System

Are 75% of the leaseholders likely to agree?

See https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/31/part/IV

37 Application by majority of parties for variation of leases.
(1)Subject to the following provisions of this section, an application may be made to [F11the appropriate tribunal] in respect of two or more leases for an order varying each of those leases in such manner as is specified in the application.
(2)Those leases must be long leases of flats under which the landlord is the same person, but they need not be leases of flats which are in the same building, nor leases which are drafted in identical terms.
(3)The grounds on which an application may be made under this section are that the object to be achieved by the variation cannot be satisfactorily achieved unless all the leases are varied to the same effect.
(4)An application under this section in respect of any leases may be made by the landlord or any of the tenants under the leases.
(5)Any such application shall only be made if!!!8212;
(a)in a case where the application is in respect of less than nine leases, all, or all but one, of the parties concerned consent to it; or
(b)in a case where the application is in respect of more than eight leases, it is not opposed for any reason by more than 10 per cent. of the total number of the parties concerned and at least 75 per cent. of that number consent to it.
(6)For the purposes of subsection (5)!!!8212;
(a)in the case of each lease in respect of which the application is made, the tenant under the lease shall constitute one of the parties concerned (so that in determining the total number of the parties concerned a person who is the tenant under a number of such leases shall be regarded as constituting a corresponding number of the parties concerned); and
(b)the landlord shall also constitute one of the parties concerned.

Any variation AFAIR would have to be registered at the LR. But you could also take the Residents Association to the First Tier (cost about £300) and let them determine whether what they will do is lawful.

As an aside, very few people know about the FTT's (the step below court / above mediation) but they are very useful for getting to the root of issues. There are employment ones, one for benefits and even information rights. You don't always have to go full tilt to court.

The_Deep

Would this not affect rental values?

NeilCr

The_Deep wrote: »

Would this not affect rental values?

I wondered that too

Looking at the other thread, though, it seems like there is a lot of free parking on the road outside and quite a few residents use that already.

This may not be much of an issue parking wise. Ian's right. My bigger concern, as expressed in the other thread, is that a few owners (as directors) are trying to push through changes that suit them - taking advantage of disinterest by other owners in the day to day running of the development.

System

Would this not affect rental values?

If it did, there would be action for damages such as this case

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/districts/bournemouth/9960349.Resident_wins_High_Court_fight_over__free_for_all__parking_scheme/

taking advantage of disinterest by other owners in the day to day running of the development.

It goes further than that IMHO as some parking companies might actually be able to establish property rights (part of any sale value) if they are there long enough. People wouldn't be disinterested if they realised that by not protecting their interests they are giving away money.

Coupon-mad

I would respond absolutely objecting, and pointing out that as a resident, you have already allowed your tenants to enjoy the same parking and other rights and easements as you enjoy as leaseholder.

Therefore (you can say) the Residents Association cannot remove this retrospectively and you intend to take them to a tribunal if they try, or if they impose other restrictions or charges that have a detrimental effect or nuisance for you and/or your tenants, and might lead to a case for damages if the rental value falls as a result.

Put a copy of that reply also, with an explanatory alarmed note, in the doors of all 24 flats with your phone number or email address and ask others to get in touch if they are concerned about this apparent attempt to vary the leases/erode the rights of residents and derogate from grant, which is unlawful. Not only that, such a regime would mean allowing an ex-clamper thug firm on site, and they are notorious for charging and suing residents; so bad is the problem for residents in such locations that it has been discussed in Parliament this year:

https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

Stir up a storm.

Slightly different but that's what I have done, twice, in my local roads to stop sheep-like people voting for a Council permit scheme that was painted as if it was a good thing. Voted out twice, and people agreed with me once they saw the real issues that the Council was not admitting would happen. All 'driveway' white H bar (parking allowed by the homeowner) lines would have been removed and replaced with double yellows, and the Council neglected to admit it. I told the local residents what would really happen and how the parking would be reduced and they'd pay for it in more ways than one.

People will follow blindly, if they are not told the disadvantages. And being told to display a permit or be sued, is not something any of them should be voting for. Add in IamEmanresu's observation, for good measure:

It goes further than that IMHO as some parking companies might actually be able to establish property rights (part of any sale value) if they are there long enough. People wouldn't be disinterested if they realised that by not protecting their interests they are giving away money.

Frighten the locals and they will NOT agree to this.