Parking Permit - Restrictions in Lease

JayBeeFrog

I am in the process of purchasing a leasehold property that sits within a controlled parking zone (CPZ). The road in which the property is located requires residents pay for parking permits to park there during the week.

This is all fine and dandy and I am happy to pay for one. However, upon recently reading the lease agreement for the property, it specifically states that we are not to approach the council in order to apply for a parking permit. It doesn't explain why.

I called the council to see if this was because of a scheme of some kind, but they said no such restriction existed on their end. So essentially, it is just the owner/landlord who has set this restriction as part of the lease, which we have yet to agree to.

Firstly, is this common and could it be negotiated/removed from the lease? (the leasehold agreement is new)

And secondly, what is to stop us simply applying for a permit anyway?

Thanks for the help.

cooltt

This can happen if original planning permission for the property or any alterations specifically stated it would increase traffic congestion in the area blah blah. However since the council has said they know of no such restriction apply for the permit.

A freeholder leases the land the dwelling occupies not the road it sits on unless it's a private estate with a private road which is not maintained by the local council.

missile

I would guess the Leaseholder is using the address for a parking permit for himself?

cooltt

missile wrote: »

I would guess the Leaseholder is using the address for a parking permit for himself?

Yep and this.

da_rule

There are similar things around here. Under the local planning policy, new town centre developments are not entitled to parking permits, except potentially in the case where a single house is simply being demolished and replaced with another single house (I assume the logic is that this will not lead to an increase in demand/cars parking).

It may be that this is the case and therefore the freeholder is attempting to protect both himself and you from a breach of planning restriction.

Their solicitor should be able to explain why this clause is actually required.

JayBeeFrog

I did wonder if such a restriction was part of the planning process, but as mentioned, according to the council, the property has no such restrictions.

To be clear, the property is a converted house of around 100 years old, split into seven flats, the property has existed as such for many decades, and was recently renovated and extended, so did require some planning permission in that sense.

Presumably if a house has been converted into flats, each of those flats is a separate address and therefore any one of those flats can theoretically apply for a parking permit?

da_rule

JayBeeFrog wrote: »

I did wonder if such a restriction was part of the planning process, but as mentioned, according to the council, the property has no such restrictions.

To be clear, the property is a converted house of around 100 years old, split into seven flats, the property has existed as such for many decades, and was recently renovated and extended, so did require some planning permission in that sense.

Presumably if a house has been converted into flats, each of those flats is a separate address and therefore any one of those flats can theoretically apply for a parking permit?

Presumably yes.

Did you speak to someone in the planning department or just the person who answered the phones, or someone in parking etc. Unfortunately, Council's are quite large and unwieldly in some areas so not all officers know about all matters.

davidmcn

I would have thought any residents parking scheme requires permits only to be issued to residents of the flat (my local scheme certainly requires evidence of both car and applicant being connected to the address), so surely a vendor couldn't retain the right to a permit anyway?

As above, really one for the solicitors to clarify rather than us to speculate.

JayBeeFrog

I spoke to the team dealing with parking permits, she informed me that she had the property information in front of her and said that there were no restrictions.

G_M

I find it hard to believe that a term in a lease can prohibit any action or relationship between the leaseholder and a 3rd party (council).


Such a term would surely be unenforcible?

Lunchbox

Our lease contains the same restriction. When I looked at the planning documents, it stated that the new addresses would not be eligible to apply to the local authority for parking permits in the surrounding CPZ (understandable, as there are over 400 new properties in total, in an already busy London area). There are several more substantial blocks going up in the vicinity, some of which are completely car free, and contain the same information about ineligibility for local parking permits in the planning.

I wouldn’t trust anything our Council told me on the phone. Most councils make planning documents freely available online; can you check the one for your property? If there’s nothing in the planning (check both the application and the approval document, which may include additional restrictions), it may be that it’s a cut-and-paste lease with the clause incorrectly left in, which would be worth querying.