People with pets and a leasehold that prohibits them - what did you do?

AdrianC

SaintJudy said:

unkle said:

If a neighbour complains to the freeholder that your animal is causing annoyance then you will likely have to remove the pets. So will come down to what the neighbours are like.

From what I'm finding it's a standard clause in leases and I'm not in a position to be able to buy somewhere freehold for my budget, so I'm looking for examples of how other people have dealt with it. I can't believe it's a straightforward case of 'look somewhere else or get rid of your animals'

If a neighbour complains, that's pretty much the definition of an annoyance has been caused - because if they weren't annoyed, they wouldn't have complained. The complaint proves itself.

Why do you not think it's that straightforward? Because you like cats, and you view cats as being less of an annoyance to others in the building than, say, dogs? The clause applies the same to all species...

You will own a share of the freehold - so, yes, you get a say in the freeholder's reaction to your request. But what proportion? Let's say there's 10 flats, so yours is one of 10 votes to determine the freeholder's actions. Remember that what you find to be an onerous restriction may be viewed as a benefit by others in the building, who also get a vote...

hazyjo

AdrianC said:

SaintJudy said:

unkle said:

If a neighbour complains to the freeholder that your animal is causing annoyance then you will likely have to remove the pets. So will come down to what the neighbours are like.

From what I'm finding it's a standard clause in leases and I'm not in a position to be able to buy somewhere freehold for my budget, so I'm looking for examples of how other people have dealt with it. I can't believe it's a straightforward case of 'look somewhere else or get rid of your animals'

You will own a share of the freehold - so, yes, you get a say in the freeholder's reaction to your request. But what proportion? Let's say there's 10 flats, so yours is one of 10 votes to determine the freeholder's actions. Remember that what you find to be an onerous restriction may be viewed as a benefit by others in the building, who also get a vote...

Not to mention owners will change. What might be okay on Day One might not be okay later. You'd have to be 100% sure that permission couldn't be revoked at a later date.

Lunchbox

SaintJudy said:

Slithery said:

SaintJudy said:
I can't believe it's a straightforward case of 'look somewhere else or get rid of your animals'

Why not? It's the answer I was about to give you as well.

Because it literally cannot be the only answer! 

I’m afraid in some circumstances it is and the only way of knowing is to speak to the freeholder because positions on this are so variable. We were told by the sellers of our flat that despite the clauses in the lease, there wouldn’t be a problem with us getting an indoor cat. Fast forward a couple of years and it’s become apparent that this is virtually the only clause our freeholder rigorously enforces, and they absolutely do not allow cats or dogs. Several leaseholders have been forced to get rid of pets despite there being no complaints from neighbours. Thankfully, we never got a cat.

NeilCr

eddddy 

TBH, if you ask the freeholder about this, I suspect the freeholder's reply will just reflect the lease - you can keep animals if they don't cause annoyance. Realistically, that's all a sensible freeholder is able to reply in these circumstances.

I guess the type of risk you face is that another leaseholder gets angry with you for some unrelated reason, and they retaliate by claiming that your cats are causing them annoyance - perhaps 'litter tray smells', fleas getting into common areas, etc.

Yes. This

We own the freehold of our estate and I am chairman of our Management Company and that's exactly what we would say. We are an animal friendly board of directors so try to give positive replies but we would have to take account of complaints given the lease. There is no way we would agree to a Deed of Variation for one flat

I do think you should have the conversation with whoever runs the Management Company now to get a sense of how they feel. They might, also, be a little less sympathetic if they felt you sneaked the cat in without telling them if a dispute did arise.

You'll be probably be fine but, as others have said, you do run the risk of falling foul of a neighbour. 

GaleSF63

SaintJudy said:

unkle said:

If a neighbour complains to the freeholder that your animal is causing annoyance then you will likely have to remove the pets. So will come down to what the neighbours are like.
I have a couple of flats that have this or a similar clause so always make it very clear to the tenant no pets and also have it included in the tenancy agreement.
If you really want to keep pets, i'd look for an alternative property so be sure.

From what I'm finding it's a standard clause in leases and I'm not in a position to be able to buy somewhere freehold for my budget, so I'm looking for examples of how other people have dealt with it. I can't believe it's a straightforward case of 'look somewhere else or get rid of your animals'

To me it would be a straightforward case of "look somewhere else".

Any lease that is conditional (if causing annoyance etc.) has the potential to cause a problem in the future - how can you settle properly with that?

i would love to have 2 (indoor) cats but I am only allowed one pet, so although it took my nearest neighbour (I am in a similar flat set-up to you) more than 2 years to find out my last cat had died, I couldn't relax with the possibility for example of 2 cats being seen in the window at the same time.

HummingBird76

The wording is so ambiguous and subjective.  It says pets that are causing an annoyance and I agree, having an indoor cat myself, that it is very unlikely they would cause an annoyance to someone else (it doesn't matter in my case as I own the flat and there's no lease).  I think a person complaining would have to prove how they are causing an annoyance, but, I think I would want to double check with management company before you make the commitment.

Scotbot

HummingBird76 said:

The wording is so ambiguous and subjective.  It says pets that are causing an annoyance and I agree, having an indoor cat myself, that it is very unlikely they would cause an annoyance to someone else (it doesn't matter in my case as I own the flat and there's no lease).  I think a person complaining would have to prove how they are causing an annoyance, but, I think I would want to double check with management company before you make the commitment.

Some people are very petty and have too much time on their hands. They will complain simply because  they can.

AdrianC

HummingBird76 said:

(it doesn't matter in my case as I own the flat and there's no lease).

How's that work?

Comms69

SaintJudy said:

Slithery said:

SaintJudy said:
I can't believe it's a straightforward case of 'look somewhere else or get rid of your animals'

Why not? It's the answer I was about to give you as well.

Because it literally cannot be the only answer! 

Well it literally is. Because you'll forfeit your lease if you're not careful. 

davidmcn

AdrianC said:

HummingBird76 said:

(it doesn't matter in my case as I own the flat and there's no lease).

How's that work?

By being in Scotland, I think. We do sometimes get title conditions about pets (though in practice I think a neighbour would need to demonstrate a fairly substantial nuisance to enforce it).