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

Ditzy_Mitzy

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! 

It is.  Freeholder's property, freeholder's rules; keeping pets is not a protected characteristic, legally, so the freeholder is within its rights to tell you not to keep them in its building.  In fact, the freeholder can tell you not to do all sorts of things or, as happened to me, instruct you to fork out thousands of pounds for general repairs.  Leasehold, generally, isn't a great system and I wouldn't buy another leasehold property.  Lots, however, have no choice given how common the things are. 
To answer the question as best I can: when I lived in a maisonette I shared an internal wall with a neighbour who kept housecats; Ragdoll or Munchkin, I forget which.  The cats were in no way an annoyance, meaning you should get away with it if the neighbours are in any way reasonable.  Unfortunately there's no sort of burden of proof if your new neighbour decides to be malicious and claim to the freeholder that your cats are irritating him/her.  If the freeholder then takes the neighbour's side, there's not a great deal you can do about it and you may be forced to comply with freeholder demands to get rid of the cats or move out.  Something similar happened to one of my neighbours with an untaxed car.  

HummingBird76

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?

I own the flat outright, no Lease.  I'm in Scotland though.  Is it different in England??

Ditzy_Mitzy

HummingBird76 said:

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?

I own the flat outright, no Lease.  I'm in Scotland though.  Is it different in England??

It's completely different south of the border!  Scottish property is all generally freehold, or has been since the end of feudal tenures and feuholds after the year 2000.  There is the odd leasehold property, apparently, but they are few in number and don't generally affect the average house buyer. 
Ownership of a Scottish freehold flat places responsibilities for the common parts on the various freeholders and, I understand, there's generally a tenement manager in place to sort all of that out.  It's swings and roundabouts, really.  In Scotland one generally gets the security and benefits of a freehold, however one also loses the advantages, there are some, of having a freeholder as a separate entity.  If the roof starts leaking, for instance, and Mr Scottish Ground Floor Flat doesn't care and refuses to pay, Miss Second Floor Flat With the Water Damage can't do much beyond reporting the matter to the council and waiting for it to take enforcement action against Mr Ground Floor.  
The Scottish system is probably better, all things considered, and does away with dreadful conceits such as leasehold houses. 

greensalad

Surely the "causes annoyance" part is the real key here? It's not a blanket ban on animals, it's a ban on animals causing annoyance. Surely in a case where someone complains you're breaching the lease (which is having a pet that causes annoyance, not just having a pet) they would have to go some way to prove the annoyance? E.g sound complaints or evidence of messes. Ergo if there is no reasonable evidence to suggest annoyance, the pet can stay?

AdrianC

If it wasn't annoying them, they wouldn't complain. Annoyance proved.

pinkpiglit

Another vote for speaking to the freeholder/Management Co. 

You don't want to end up in a position of being forced to rehome your pet which is what happened here:    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5330855/Couple-lose-court-bid-dog-luxury-flat.html

greensalad

AdrianC said:

If it wasn't annoying them, they wouldn't complain. Annoyance proved.

Most challenges need to be reasonable though. Like, I can't imagine saying "me seeing your cat in a window is annoying" would count as reasonable "annoyance". Same deal as, for example, "quiet enjoyment" in tenancy agreements. It's hard to define what "quiet enjoyment" explicitly entails. 

csgohan4

greensalad said:

AdrianC said:

If it wasn't annoying them, they wouldn't complain. Annoyance proved.

Most challenges need to be reasonable though. Like, I can't imagine saying "me seeing your cat in a window is annoying" would count as reasonable "annoyance". Same deal as, for example, "quiet enjoyment" in tenancy agreements. It's hard to define what "quiet enjoyment" explicitly entails. 

Sadly what is reasonable is out of your hands. You run the risk of getting curtain twitching neighbors who will report you for anything petty, especially lease restrictions. You may not have that issue, but the risk will always be there as your neighbors may change for the better or the worse. 

Would you rather not have destiny in your hands, than hope for the best and not get caught

hb2

We have 2 cats and moved into this flat 3 years ago. Before we even viewed somewhere, we asked the EA about pets - as has been said, many purpose built blocks have a blanket 'no pets' clause. When we decided we liked this flat, we asked for sight of the relevant page of the lease, and got our vendors to ask the other freeholders whether they would object to pets, very early in the process of buying.

One of our cats has medical problems and doesn't go outside. The other goes out and is a prolific hunter. I'm always worried if other people leave outside doors open as I am afraid that cat will wander around the communal areas and become a nuisance - we hope to have him with us for many years yet and I would be heartbroken if we were asked to re-home him (I would rather lose my home than my cat but OH doesn't feel the same way). 

DoaM

greensalad said:

AdrianC said:

If it wasn't annoying them, they wouldn't complain. Annoyance proved.

Most challenges need to be reasonable though. Like, I can't imagine saying "me seeing your cat in a window is annoying" would count as reasonable "annoyance". Same deal as, for example, "quiet enjoyment" in tenancy agreements. It's hard to define what "quiet enjoyment" explicitly entails. 

Another angle to look at this is ... if someone with an interest (a leaseholder/joint freeholder) takes offence at the animal (i.e. annoyance) and continually complains to the other joint freeholders/managing agent, what path is likely to be pursued? The path of least resistance - it's easier to enforce the term and have the animal gone than to have to constantly deal with complaints.