Freeholder giving other leaseholders additional rights?

Pikashoe

Hey there!

I'm a flat leasehold owner in a 3 story building (top 2 floors are flats, bottom is a shop) and we have a shared carriageway that leads to the apartment stairwell. 
In the leases of my property (+ other 2 leases) it states the carriage way is 'Shared access' and makes no reference to parking. In fact, there isn't a lowered curb and the carriageway is part of listed-building protections. 

My question is: Can the freeholder decide one of the leases has exclusive parking rights within a 'shared access' zone? To be clear, I can still walk to and from my home as the shop parks there car/bike at the back so sidedoor can still be accessed. It sounds petty, but as the shop leasehold doesn't own any of the shared access land or have those rights written into their leases, it feels a bit dodgy! 

Thanks for any thoughts!
-Shaun

P.S: I don't care a huge amount, but I got bossed about by the new shop owner recently making me move from that area!

jonnydeppiwish!

What does your lease say about the access?

Brie

so the shop keeper is driving over the pavement where the council hasn't agreed to a dropped kerb?  I thought that was illegal as the weight of a vehicle could damage whatever is under the pavement - sewer pipes etc.  It's one of the reasons one is not supposed to park with 2 wheels on the kerb due to the potential for damage (as well as it blocks the path for pedestrians)

zagubov

I' think this varies from council to council. I know of places where parking on the pavement is allowed, usually with markings on the pavement.

Pikashoe

jonnydeppiwish! said:

What does your lease say about the access?

The only mention of this piece of land is here: (Same for all three leases)
""the right of way over the side access and yard area to the rear together with the right to store rubbish in an area to be approved by the landlord"

No reference to parking at all

Pikashoe

I kinda come to accept that this might be 'tough luck' if the freeholder endorses this. As the inconvenience is minor and I can still access my property. I suppose it is more useful to know in principle if I decided to park my car in 'their spot' or otherwise be a naughty neighbour, would I have the same legal protections/faults as them?
It just feels unfair to bump up rent costs/devalue others by making an area an exclusive parking spot despite nothing in leases. Having random cars + bikes from their staff/customers come in and out can be a minor nuisance. 

TLDR: As the shop owner recently moved in and has been bossy 'This cannot happen, stay out of this area, don't put your bins here, clean/weed the drive' etc... it is just nice to know if I'm able to inform him correctly that his landlord has unfairly sold him a hope and not an exclusive right if he pushes again. 

 

Pikashoe

Brie said:

so the shop keeper is driving over the pavement where the council hasn't agreed to a dropped kerb?  I thought that was illegal as the weight of a vehicle could damage whatever is under the pavement - sewer pipes etc.  It's one of the reasons one is not supposed to park with 2 wheels on the kerb due to the potential for damage (as well as it blocks the path for pedestrians)

The district is Harrogate.... but tbh I see plenty of people parked on curbs and never get a ticket, so unlikely to be enforced here I imagine! 

canaldumidi

if there is no dropped curb and accessing this area to park a car involves bumping upa curb and/or crossing a public footpath/pavement, that would be illegal.

Whether a council enforces or not depends on a) their attitude to breaches of this nature b) their resources and c) whether anyone has complained or informed them of the repeated breach of the law.......

Obviously any clause in a lease which involved breaking the law would be unenforcible.

Having said that, if you put aside the dropped curb aspect, then I suspect that amending the shop lease to grant them a parking area would be permissable provided it does not infringe on the rights of the other leaseholders. You say:

Pikashoe said:

The only mention of this piece of land is here: (Same for all three leases)
""the right of way over the side access and yard area to the rear together with the right to store rubbish in an area to be approved by the landlord"

No reference to parking at all

so provided you still have a ROW (presumably on foot) then your own rights have not been impacted.

eddddy

Pikashoe said:

My question is: Can the freeholder decide one of the leases has exclusive parking rights within a 'shared access' zone? 

You need to read your lease thoroughly and cross-reference different parts, to see what rights you have.

For example, it's possible that your lease might include the following (if you're not familiar with 'covenants' you can think of them as 'rules')   :

• There is a covenant in your lease saying that you must not park and/or leave anything in the access area.

• There is a covenant in your lease saying that the freeholder will put the same covenants in all leases in the building (i.e. every leaseholder has to follow the same rules)

• There is a covenant in your lease saying that the freeholder will enforce covenants on other leaseholders, if you request it

(But these will be in different parts of your lease.)


In that case, in simple terms, you can tell the freeholder to stop the shop leaseholder parking there. But you might have to pay the freeholder's costs for doing that.

Leases for flats are generally constructed in that way, but the above is really just guessing. You need to read your specific lease, and as it's a shop downstairs, your lease might have been constructed differently.