Parking charge notice threat

Moo68

I own and have lived in my private leasehold flat for 25 years. There were no double yellow lines initially but over the years the management company (run by a few residents) deemed it necessary to put these down and start to try and enforce parking restrictions. Every flat with the exception of one has a garage or allocated parking space, but most flats have at least one vehicle, some two and with cars being bigger, most garages are unable to take these larger cars, resulting in a lot of residents and their visitors parking along the side of the driveway that runs through the surrounding grounds of the block of flats. Although on occasions this has caused a few problems with inconsiderate parking, everyone seems to be able to park somewhere without much hassle.
What has now been decided by the management company ( a grand total of 3 or 4 residents!) is that they are going to employ a company to issue parking charge notices to anyone that is parked anywhere other than in an allocated bay, and to display their parking permits. Visitors can only stay 4 hours. This is where it just will not work, there are too many cars and not enough spaces. We’ve been told to park on the road, again a problem as we are the nearest road to a mainline station to London and the commuters pack this road and surrounding ones from early morning until the evening.
We’ve been told that if we refuse to pay these “invoices” then they will be added to our quarterly maintenance bill and stay on our account until we pay up. This is where I need help. Firstly, am I right in assuming that as this is private property and the double yellow lines were put in ad-hoc, and are not on the original deeds, that these fines aren’t enforceable? Secondly, can these unpaid fines be added to our maintenace bill? I need to stand my ground on this and am prepared to visit my local solicitor and pay for legal advice, but any advice from anyone in the know would be much appreciated before I take the legal route.
Thanks

Coupon-mad

Look up on Google, because I'd say you have this:

Easement by prescription

I own and have lived in my private leasehold flat for 25 years.

And also read threads (search this forum for keywords) that talk about the Landlord & Tenant Act and the need to get 75% consensus agreement from a full consultation with notices in advance to all leaseholders, not telling you about a scheme but asking you for your views/agreement or objection (first!).

There must be not more than 10% objecting, BEFORE a private nuisance like this scam, that would require a formal variation of your lease, can even get off the ground. So you know what to do this weekend, flyer all your neighbours and ratchet up the pressure by calling a meeting and making sure more than 10% of leaseholders OBJECT.

I need to stand my ground on this and am prepared to visit my local solicitor and pay for legal advice,

That's good. You could ask about an injunction being served, like in Roger Davey v UKPC:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377246-UKPC-liable-for-trespass-**SUCCESS**

You should warn the entity that's proposing this that they will be liable for the 4 figure cost of your emergency injunction - but don't throw too much money at legal bills like these idiots:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6172095/Neighbours-ten-year-war-30-inch-parking-space-ends-warring-parties-paying-bills.html

In my (non legally trained) mind, that was an easy enough case to fight without leaning too much on a solicitor!

Clearly Mr Soden had an easement by prescription (more than 20 years use/grant to use the land - like you!). It hardly took fine legal minds to work it out, IMHO.

[Deleted User]

If you do not already know, find out how you can become a director of the management company.


In addition, you could try sending the management company a letter along the lines of...


[The indented paragraphs started life being numbered, but I suspect that will be lost when I click 'Submit Reply'.]






Dear <salutation>,





I understand that the management company has decided to engage a parking operator to manage parking in the car park and that, if residents do not abide by the parking operator’s terms, they will be required to pay exorbitant parking charges.





You must surely know that, when it comes to a leasehold property, it is the lease which sets out the rights and obligations of all the parties to it. The lease is of paramount importance. It has primacy of contract over any other arrangements made by any other arrangements made by any of the parties to it.





In order to satisfy me that you have undertaken due diligence insofar as this matter is concerned, I shall be grateful if you will provide me within the next 30 days (and before the commencement of any proposed parking scheme) the following information and documents:-

• if the management company believes that my lease contains express provision to allow the parking operator to operate a parking scheme on my allocated parking space, a note of the specific clauses in the lease applicable to this situation;

• if the management company believes that any rules or regulations have been made in accordance with my lease’s provisions to allow the parking operator to operate a parking scheme on my allocated parking space:-

1. a copy of those rules or regulations duly signed, etc. by the person(s) who made them; and

1. a note of the specific clause(s) in the lease in accordance with which those rules or regulations were made;

• if the management company believes that my lease’s terms permit third parties, e.g. the parking operator, to enforce the lease’s terms despite the legal principle of privity of contract, a note of the specific clause(s) in the lease applicable to this situation;

• if the management company does not believe that my lease’s terms permit third parties, e.g. the parking operator, due to the legal principle of privity of contract, a note explaining how the management company has concluded that the parking operator has acquired such a right;

• if the parking operator’s parking scheme has not been introduced in accordance with my lease’s provisions, a note explaining how the management company has concluded that its parking contract with the parking operator and the parking operator’s alleged parking contract(s) with driver(s) parking on my allocated parking space have acquired primacy of contract over my lease;

• notes giving details of the due diligence process undertaken by the management company and the parking contractor to ensure that not only the management company’s parking contract with the parking operator but also the purported contract(s) between the parking contractor and driver(s) parking on my allocated parking space met the “Implied term about care and skill” requirement contained in the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982;

• a note giving the management company’s explanation as to how the ticketing and charging regime will accord with the legal principle of non-derogation from grant implied in all leases;

• a note giving the management company’s explanation as to how the proposed parking regime with its exorbitant parking charges and no doubt threats of court action against lessees who do not pay them will accord with the legal principle of quiet enjoyment implied in all leases; and

• any other information and documents on which the management company would rely in court in support of its belief that the current parking regime is valid.

The purpose of requesting the documents and information requested above is, of course, to narrow the issues between the management company and myself. Naturally, if you provide everything which I seek, I shall reconsider my position.





If the management company has acted with due diligence in this matter, the management company will no doubt have covered all of the above matters with its legal advisers and you should have no difficulty meeting my request.





In the event, however, that you do not provide me with the above information and documents within the next 30 days (and before the commencement of any proposed parking scheme), I am writing to tell you that the management company must defer the parking scheme’s introduction until the above requested information and documents have been provided.





If the parking scheme is introduced in accordance with our leases (and the management company lacks the power to introduce it in any other way), then any breach of its conditions would be a breach of the relevant resident’s lease. The remedy for such a breach is damages from the leaseholder and/or an injunction ordering the leaseholder not to repeat the breach in the future. It would not be an arbitrary so-called parking charge payable to a parking operator which has no rights under the lease.





It is, of course, perverse that a private car park intended for the exclusive use of residents should be turned into a public car park where, according to the parking operator’s parking scheme, Tom, !!!! and Harry will be able to park on terms no different from those available to that defined group.





Has all necessary planning permission been obtained for this change of use from residential to parking? Has planning permission been obtained for the parking operator’s unsightly signage which would be regarded as advertising by the local authority?





In essence, the notion that the management company could be able to allow a parking operator to use our car park for the purpose of its business is as ridiculous as the notion that the management company could be able to allow a property letting agent to rent out our apartments for the purposes of its business.





I look forward to receiving your reply within the next 30 days (and before the commencement of any proposed parking scheme).





Yours sincerely,

Guys_Dad

I would also add that if they bring this in without following the proper procedure, each one of them will be individually liable for any action that leaseholders might take as they have been previously warned.

Moo68

Thanks for the helpful advice, it make interesting reading, particularly the variation of the lease and the minimum of 10% objection from residents. This should’ve been put to the vote so that all 62 flats can have a fair say, but the committee are a law unto themselves I’m afraid. It’s going to be a bit of a battle so I’m going to be a busy girl this weekend!
My only concern about going into battle is that some of the residents including myself, are in breach of the lease as we are unable to use our garages due to them being too small and are parking in the allocated visitors bays and the “double yellow lines”. Or, like many households have a second car. This is what the committee are trying to enforce, to stop this and make the residents park in the road, an impossible task being so close to the train station. The committee go about things totally the wrong way, even putting a notice on the communal board calling all residents that have a large car “ selfish and inconsiderate for buying a large vehicle that won’t fit in the garage, and that it’s not their fault that we’ve done so!”
Any body have any advice regarding adding these charges to our quarterly maintenance bill if we don’t pay the parking charge notice?
Many thanks

onlyfoolsandparking

Moo68 wrote: »

Thanks for the helpful advice, it make interesting reading, particularly the variation of the lease and the minimum of 10% objection from residents. This should’ve been put to the vote so that all 62 flats can have a fair say, but the committee are a law unto themselves I’m afraid. It’s going to be a bit of a battle so I’m going to be a busy girl this weekend!

And by the sounds of it STUPID!!!! if they think they can railroad the residents into employing a parking scammer, I mean come on how stupid is that.


Personally I would get ALL the residents to strongly object to this so called committee and tell them to shove their parking idea up their a***s!!!


There will of course be a solution to your parking issue that will be balanced, proportionate and well thought out, unfortunately none of those words are familiar to PPC,s Good luck with it

[Deleted User]

The directors would almost certainly be acting outside their powers if they added the parking operator’s charges to your service charge accounts. That would put them in breach of your lease.

Your lease will specify what you need to pay as ongoing charges. These will almost certainly consist of nothing more than ground rent and service charges. The ground rent will very probably be a fixed amount. The service charges will, of course, vary from year to year but what can be included in the service charges will almost certainly be specified within your lease and I would eat my hat if parking charges are covered.

I think you are underestimating the strength of the arguments which you can make here.

Coupon-mad

Any body have any advice regarding adding these charges to our quarterly maintenance bill if we don’t pay the parking charge notice?

They cannot do that. You need to get other residents onside, and quickly.

Moo68

Thank you to all that have posted and given your advice and support. It’s given me a renewed confidence to stand up to theses patronising, incompetent nincompoops! We have put up with their sarcastic, narcissitic rants for long enough and I, for one are going to stand up and be heard, regardless of my parking rights or not! We live in a democratic society and as such, I have rights along with my other 62 neighbours, whether they choose to listen or not remains to be seen! Go me! ........ Watch this space........

The_Slithy_Tove

Moo68 wrote: »

It’s given me a renewed confidence to stand up to theses patronising, incompetent nincompoops! We have put up with their sarcastic, narcissitic rants for long enough

If the management company is made up of residents, that suggests the freehold and possible the actual management company is jointly owned by the leaseholders. Can you confirm whether this is the case, or if not, how those residents get to run the management company?

Where this is leading is to say that surely there's a way for you and the other leaseholders to throw/vote them out and replace them with more competent people. The problem is that most residents won't want to take it on (too much effort), leaving it to the nosey busybodies to abuse their position.

Moo68

We had the opportunity to buy the freehold a couple of years back, but needed 51% and more to be able to own it collectively. We had 51% but one resident dropped out and that was the end of that. You’re right in saying that nobody wants to take on the responsibility of the day to day management of the block, and to be fair to them they do a good job with maintaining the gardens and keeping the communal areas cleaned and in good decorative order. We also pay an external property management company that basically do a lot of the leg work regarding sourcing contractors and getting quotes etc. I’d rather we handed the whole thing over to them to be honest, they would be impartial and not emotionally attached and would be worth the extra cost. We have the residents committee to keep costs down, but without consultation with the residents they’ve recently spent money from the funds to install bollards and speed bumps in the driveway, something the PCC insisted was done before they would take on the contract for our block. I’m not sure if they would’ve needed permission from the freeholder to do this and would there need to be a variation of the lease to do this as well? It’s all a bit of a minefield! I’m going to gather all the information that people have kindly posted on here and compose a flyer and also email the external management company with the relevant points and see what they have to say. We only have a week before the PPC arrive.