Considering suing my freeholder for derogation from grant - any advice?

artyboy

eddddy said:

artyboy said:

Lots of 'shoulds' 

I'm not sure why using the word "should" is a problem - as in "You should not drive faster than 70 mph", "You should not murder people".

What word would you like me to use instead - that would be concise and easy to understand, and isn't too 'emotional'?

artyboy said:

(you forgot to include that leaseholders cars should be whitelisted so they don't even need permits)

What makes you think I forgot that as a possibility? It's pretty obvious.

That would be another way of managing the parking. 

Obviously, it would involve...

• leaseholders registering their registration number

• registering the reg number of a hire car, or a loan car

• registering the reg number of visitors, etc

• updating reg number details when leaseholders change their car

So an administrator would need to be paid to maintain that list - taking phone call updates, actioning emails

• Would an administrator need to be available evenings and weekends to update the list, in case you hire a car or have unexpected visitors over a weekend or in the evening?

• Or maybe an app or website could be developed which allows leaseholders to make updates online (but that app might be expensive - and the leaseholders would have to cover the cost)

• But would some leaseholders (perhaps older ones) not have access to smartphones or computers and/or not be comfortable using that apps and websites?

None of those problems are insurmountable. But the overall cost to leaseholders might be higher than simply paying £12 and putting a card/sticker on their dashboard.

artyboy said:

but if you read a small selection of threads on the parking boards, you'll see that's just not how it happens in practice.

It's not exactly rocket science when you consider these parking 'firms' (putting it politely) make a living from issuing tickets. Or did you actually think they're happy just with the fees they get from residential managing agents...?

To answer your questions..

• I've read lots of those threads
• I understand the business model of Parking management companies
• I didn't think what you suggest I think

So to summarise...

• The concept of managing parking on housing estates is a good one

• Many of the companies that offer parking management services are dodgy, and rely on a flawed business model

So the solution probably is:

• Management companies should be more careful about the parking management companies they hire

• Management companies should pay the parking companies a fixed fee for managing the parking, rather than let those companies rely on income from parking charge notices.

So for example, a Management Company should pay a parking company, say, £1000 or £2000 a year (or pay £100 per visit) to send somebody around periodically to check car regs etc, and issue Parking Charge Notices - and any parking charges collected should go to the management company.

And those costs (e.g. £1000 or £2000 year) should come from the leaseholders service charge funds - i.e. it is paid by all the leaseholders.


Does that all make sense?

It all makes sense now you have clarified what you actually meant 

But there's actually another serious point there about management companies getting the revenue - definitely an opportunity for less scrupulous mancos to collude with the (even less scrupulous) parking firms.

Sadly I suspect, especially with larger residential blocks (which are likely to have a smaller proportion of properly engaged leaseholders), this happens all too easily. Residents are promised that all their parking issues will be fixed, and the ugly truth only comes to light later on...

Grizebeck

The way quite a few parking companies work is this
For every paid ticket on a housing estate the management company get a kick back on each paid ticket
hence why so many introduce them without a proper ballot and against the wishes of the leaseholders

eddddy

user1977 said:

eddddy said:

artyboy said:

Lots of 'shoulds' 

So for example, a Management Company should pay a parking company, say, £1000 or £2000 a year (or pay £100 per visit) to send somebody around periodically to check car regs etc, and issue Parking Charge Notices - and any parking charges collected should go to the management company.

And those costs (e.g. £1000 or £2000 year) should come from the leaseholders service charge funds - i.e. it is paid by all the leaseholders.

There's an even simpler (and more money-saving) solution which is that you invite the parking company in for free to manage the parking, and they can keep whatever they collect from the unauthorised parkers. No need for the leaseholders to pay anything.

That's how they work at the moment - and that's what causes the problems.

• The parking company are incentivised to issue unfair parking charge notices to leaseholders - to increase their income.

• And they are equally incentivised to reject valid 'appeals' from leaseholders - to maximise their income.

For example, if a leaseholder's permit has fallen off the dashboard onto the floor. Or the leaseholder is using a loan car and forgot to put the permit on the dashboard.

And then they send nasty letters to leaseholders saying

• "Pay £50 within 14 days, or the bill goes up to £100" 
• And then "Pay £100 within 60 days or the bill goes up to £150"
• And then "If you don't pay immediately, we'll take you to court - and you'll have huge costs to pay"

The parking company often have no intention of taking leaseholders to court (because they'd probably lose) - but leaseholders get intimidated into paying.


And the freeholder has signed a contract with the parking management company saying something like "The parking management company will handle all disputes about parking charges - so the freeholder is not allowed to get involved in any of the disputes."

eddddy

Grizebeck said:

The way quite a few parking companies work is this
For every paid ticket on a housing estate the management company get a kick back on each paid ticket
hence why so many introduce them without a proper ballot and against the wishes of the leaseholders

If you've been reading on the Parking Board about lease variations happening because of 'a ballot of leaseholders'...

... that's an urban myth.

Lease variations don't magically happen as a result of 'a ballot of leaseholders'.

DullGreyGuy

Grizebeck said:
 against the wishes of the leaseholders

Please provide the evidence of this @Grizebeck because it sounds much more like someone with an axe to grind than something based on actual statistical analysis. 

Stopping commuters parking in residents parking spaces via the use of parking companies was welcomed by residents in each of the developments I've lived in thats done it. 

Grizebeck

DullGreyGuy said:

Grizebeck said:
 against the wishes of the leaseholders

Please provide the evidence of this @Grizebeck because it sounds much more like someone with an axe to grind than something based on actual statistical analysis. 

Stopping commuters parking in residents parking spaces via the use of parking companies was welcomed by residents in each of the developments I've lived in thats done it. 

Let's just say I see it week month in month out of county court claims I deal with 
Only welcomed until the residents are targeted when the commuters have vanished.

eddddy

Grizebeck said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Grizebeck said:
 against the wishes of the leaseholders

Please provide the evidence of this @Grizebeck because it sounds much more like someone with an axe to grind than something based on actual statistical analysis. 

Stopping commuters parking in residents parking spaces via the use of parking companies was welcomed by residents in each of the developments I've lived in thats done it. 

Let's just say I see it week month in month out of county court claims I deal with 
Only welcomed until the residents are targeted when the commuters have vanished.

So the solution isn't "Get rid of parking management companies".

Instead possible solutions include:

• Give residents a simple, fair, robust way of cancelling unfair parking charges

and/or

• Pay the parking management companies a flat fee for managing the parking, so they are not incentivised to issue unfair charges to residents

So residents should engage with the management company to explain the problems and propose solutions - rather than just getting angry and ranting.
 

ThisIsWeird

h2g2 said:

Firstly, the freeholder has given the rights to decide who is authorised to park and who is not to a private company, when the leasehold agreement says the leaseholder has unfettered rights to park.

"But I own that spot" is not a defense as far as they're concerned.

The issue with commuters entering the car park without authorisation is a security issue. We have a security gate.
It's actually very unlikely any charge with a reasonable defense would stick anyway.

Hi H2.

I'd have thought - but don't know - that your rights under your Lease would override any attempt by this 3rd party to charge you for 'mis-parking'. Provided you do use your own allocated space (are they determined?), I doubt the CP Co would succeed in fining you, even without a permit. And even less likely if you had a valid reason - permit applied for but not received, permit sun-faded, other car parked in your space, etc.

Ie - "I own that space" should be a defence if you've been unfairly charged.

I don't understand the point about 'security' - you say there is a security gate? How is this controlled, and why doesn't that do the job?

Is this new arrangement going to cost the Leaseholders anything to set up and run (other than potential fines!)? If so, would a remote-control barrier be a good alternative?

nicmyles

I cannot imagine it is legally possible for a company to charge you for parking your car on your own property that is demised to you under the lease, unless the lease makes provision for it to do so. You need to consult a solicitor.

I am not a lawyer, and leasehold can be complicated. 

I guess your only issue is if they were to claim that they are not, in fact, charging you to use your own space, but are charging you for entrance to the car parking area, which involves you travelling over land you do not own?

Grizebeck

nicmyles said:

I cannot imagine it is legally possible for a company to charge you for parking your car on your own property that is demised to you under the lease, unless the lease makes provision for it to do so. You need to consult a solicitor.

I am not a lawyer, and leasehold can be complicated. 

I guess your only issue is if they were to claim that they are not, in fact, charging you to use your own space, but are charging you for entrance to the car parking area, which involves you travelling over land you do not own?

You should see how parking companies operate by seeing the parking ticket section 
So many parking firms ride over the rights of lease holders
PCM being a common one