Restrictive Covenants - parking on a local highway

HampshireH

User_220321 said:

Just to update everyone, the route we are taking regarding the charges is taking longer due to COVID. However, in the meantime, the freeholders have had their legal department review the whole situation, every piece of correspondence and all legal documentation involved. They have concluded that as the roads are adopted, we are free to park the van on the public highway and there is no breach on our behalf. 

Obviously the final task is to have the charges removed and stop this person leading through threats, intimidation and unnecessary aggravation on matters which are of no concern to them. 

This has taken up countless hours of my time in phone calls and emails but I dread to think of all of the people who possibly haven’t been quite so determined.

I find it so odd that the freeholder is still using this person to act for them when their own legal advice contradicts their actions

User_220321

I find it so odd that the freeholder is still using this person to act for them when their own legal advice contradicts their actions

I agree, surely they can do more now. It has just seemed over the months that no one has wanted the hassle of dealing with it. However, now the freeholders have had to do a full legal review of all the documents involved and they have made a stance. If this had happened back in January when we first raised this, then we probably wouldn’t have had a further several months of stress, charge threats and letters. I will update this thread when there is a final outcome as I’m sure others may have been in similar situations.

Ditzy_Mitzy

Thank you for letting us all know  .  I had a feeling this would be the outcome, and hope that the rest of it gets sorted forthwith.  Ridiculous business all round.  

User_220321

Just to update everyone on this post.
We have received the tribunal ruling which confirms that when the roads were adopted in 2013, they were no longer estate roads and therefore the lease is non applicable to those roads. Furthermore, parking on these roads is to be controlled by the highway authority, not the managing agent. 

It has also been stated by the judge that no charges can be made to us and money cannot be claimed from the service charge - another worry we had as the managing agent has previously claimed money for their time spent dealing with ‘breaches of the lease’ from the service charge account in addition to taking the money paid by residents in these circumstances. 

Throughout the legal proceedings, the managing agent attempted the get the application struck out several times for various reasons and the tribunal refused this. 

We have had a substantial amount of threatening letters and emails from the managing agent over the past year - including the threat of an injunction at our expense. The stress it has caused is unbelievable. I also have evidence to show that the agent knew they had no jurisdiction over the roads and this evidence dates back to over 5 years ago.

It is a great result but I can’t stop thinking that this should have been resolved earlier by someone like the freeholders. I hope this helps anyone who has been in our situation and I will always offer any help from my own experience if anyone would like it.

New legislation is also on the horizon which should regulate managing agents and hopefully help to stop this sort of situation ever happening in the first place.

Finally, a word of warning:
When the resident director of the estate is also the director of the managing agent used by that estate, not to mention that they are also the bookkeeper and secretary, it clearly has the potential to create big problems which are not easily resolved. 

K_S

@user_220321 Well done for seeing this through, it can't have been easy! I'm honestly surprised they took it so far. God only knows how much they've milked other leaseholders for, citing powers that they don't have.

FreeBear

K_S said: God only knows how much they've milked other leaseholders for, citing powers that they don't have.

Inform the other leaseholders of the current situation, and if they have been "milked", they can claim the money back. If the management Co. refuses, there is always the small claims court and a good chance of winning.

TripleH

Congratulations on the outcome.

I'd be cautious though, this individual sounds like they are on a power trip and I wouldn't be surprised if they try off loading the costs of their actions on residents some way. Can you replace them by sorting acright to manage?

Ditzy_Mitzy

Congratulations!  Well done for seeing the matter through, but it really shouldn't have been necessary in the circumstances.  At least you've now got something on paper and can get on with life.  

User_220321

If anyone would like to read the ruling/ decision, it has been published and you can now read it online here:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/61e1746a8fa8f50588fedfdc/18_Holly_Wood_Way_Blackpool_FY4_5FQ.pdf

csgohan4

the sad thing noone wins. You will probably pay for the other sides costs indirectly through the service charges

well done for getting back