PCM company introduced

Umkomaas

Nice result and a great example for others who will likely come to the forum as more and more residential sites are threatened with PPC infestation.

NeilCr

The_Deep wrote: »

The managing agency is also threatening to charge a service charge if we continue to enquire about this, which is ridiculous considering that the other flat has continuous contact with them.

That would not be very clever, they could immediately be taken to these people, where, imo, they would get a thrashing.

https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-property-chamber

Have you complained to ARLA?

https://www.arla.co.uk/

What about complaining to your MP.

To be honest I have some sympathy for the MA here (although they should have known the legislation).

I rather suspect that they found themselves spending an inordinate amount of time and money on dealing with a very small block on one issue.

For information

If you are going to complain to Arla PropertyMark then there is a process to go through.

It is outlined here


https://www.propertymark.co.uk/complaints/

Rapacji

Hi all,

It has been a while and we are still awaiting for the signs to come down. The date is fast approaching and it does worry us that they have yet to come down. The MA told us to inform the unhappy flat about the cancellation of contract with PCM. We were waiting for signs to come down, as we did not want them to try to appeal it in any way with the MA. When we rang PCM on Monday, they said that the contract had indeed been cancelled and that the signs would be taken down "soon".

We have now received an email in which the MA has contacted all the leaseholders, essentially threatening to say that they have been getting more complaints and that they had asked us to solve this amicably and we had failed to do so (this makes me believe that they have somehow told the unhappy neighbours before giving us a chance to speak to them).

They are stating that if we somehow believe we have the right to park an additional car they will instruct a solicitor to download information from the land registry and conduct a full lease audit and that leaseholders would be responsible for a service charge.

They are also stating that they are not instructed by us, but by the freeholder, and that if we do not resolve the matter they will contact the freeholder to recommend a legal route regarding breach of lease in terms of demised parking or that they will suggest that the freeholder block off all visitor parking thus rendering them unusable.

One of the leaseholders has tried to speak to these neighbours but they have ignored him and not answered the door. We have also overheard these neighbours actually telling another flat to park in the visitor space, probably to build their case about people using the visitor parking inappropriately.

Again, I would appreciate any input or ideas. Unsure whether it is worth responding to the MA or not.

NeilCr

Have you found out what the lease says about parking yet? We really need to know that

I did wonder if they would go with blocking the visitor parking as the easiest way to stop the bickering.

Rapacji

It says something along the lines of "parking in space __ for the purpose of parking one motor vehicle" but does not mention the rest of the land.

It also says "not to leave or park or permit to be left or parked so as to cause any obstruction in or on any roads or passageways within adjacent or leading to the building any motor car motor cycle bicycle perambulator or other vehicle belonging to or used by the tenant or occupier of the demised premises or by any of his or hers friends, servants or visitors and to observe all regulations made by the landlord from time to time relating to the parking of such vehicles".

There's nothing in there about who can or cannot use the visitor parking.

Fruitcake

If it has been decided that the signs should not be there, then it matters not who removes them and then takes timed and dated photographic evidence that the signs have been removed.

I believe that telling the scammers where the signs are and can be collected will prevent any subsequent accusation of theft.

Coupon-mad

Put black binbags over the signs without damaging them (maybe with a white sticker on the bags, stating 'PCM contract confirmed cancelled by Managing Agent - confirmed 19.5.19'), and take photos in advance to prove that they were covered AND NOT DAMAGED - in case PCM rock up and take photos and issue PCNs anyway.

Or remove them and pile them up, again taking photos to prove no damage was caused.

they will suggest that the freeholder block off all visitor parking thus rendering them unusable.

I'd reply (signed by all the 3 leaseholders who are not the miseryguts) and ask the MA if they missed the bit in Kettel v Bloomfold that caused the servient landowners to have to pay compensation to the leaseholders for removing or relocating spaces that previously existed. The fact that it is visitor bays that are the subject of this particular matter is not likely to distinguish the facts from Bloomfold.

You should also ask at the same time, whether the alleged new complaints are just coming from one single flat, whose residents have been overheard actively telling another resident to park in the visitor space, no doubt to build their case about people using the visitor parking 'inappropriately'.

Finish by confirming that the signatories (and the tenants of flats x, xx, xx, and xx) have all happily agreed and resolved the matter, and made their objections to any changes or restrictions clear, in accordance with the L&T Act. The single dissenting flat-owner is in fact actively encouraging people to park there to deliberately cause a problem, and as such, should not be the voice that is allowed to spoil everyone else's peaceful enjoyment. Rather, it appears they are causing a private nuisance and should be warned to cease and desist.

One of the leaseholders has tried to speak to these neighbours but they have ignored him and not answered the door. We have also overheard these neighbours actually telling another flat to park in the visitor space, probably to build their case about people using the visitor parking inappropriately.

Trick them into being recorded on your phone doing this, more than once. It might be useful.

Fruitcake

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Put black binbags over the signs without damaging them (maybe with a white sticker on the bags, stating 'PCM contract confirmed cancelled by Managing Agent - confirmed 19.5.19'), and take photos in advance to prove that they were covered AND NOT DAMAGED - in case PCM rock up and take photos and issue PCNs anyway.

Or remove them and pile them up, again taking photos to prove no damage was caused.

I see no problem with physically unbolting the signs, leaving them in a secure place, and informing the scammers of the location where their property is available for collection, and taking photographs of the place where the signs once were.

NeilCr

If I was the MA I'd get legal advice (likely be paid for from the service charges) and plonk it in front of the four leaseholders and say this is it. Dependent on what that advice is I'd also say we are going to do x, y and z - after clearing with the freeholder.

"And we don't want to hear from any of you, again, on the matter!"

I'd also be tearing my hair out.....

Presumably, the person from the other flat who had the conversation with the neighbours is on "your side"? And will be happy to attest to what they were told.