Landlord / Managing Agents Introduced a Private Parking Firm in Block of Flats

h2g2

fisherjim said:

I personally would not use the word "regulations" they cannot impose regulations it makes these greedy muppets look too legitimate.

Indeed, but worth mimicking the language from the lease where possible. My leasehold reserves, for the management company: "the right to regulate: to create and enforce reasonable regulations for the good management of the estate" (or words close to that).

KoalaMSEF

lr1277 said:

I am going to offer something from the other side. Feel free to take it or leave it.

I live in a block of flats near a town centre with an assigned parking space. There is no barrier to enter the car park. So literally anybody could come and park in our space.

I once went to the gym and when I returned a few hours later, a builder had parked in my spot and point blank refused to move when I told him he was in my space. My space apparently was close to the flat he was working in. I didn't want to park in anyone elses space so went and parked off-site. That was a pain.

Also there is one visitor's spot and a car would stay there for weeks at a time. Then be replaced with another car which would stay for weeks at a time. Speculation was that it was some kind of car dealer using the space for storage. This annoyed many of the other residents, especially the directors (see next sentence).

All the owners can apply to be directors of the block. Only a few do so. The directors in conjunction with the managing agent to hire a parking company. Now every owner gets a badge. You can get a replacement badge for a cost. Also contractors can come and park with a code given to them by the owner/tenant. A resident can get a code from the parking company for free. It has to be a company who can be contacted. This scheme is not for friends to park. If you want friends to park, you can buy a book temporary permits, though I think this might be only for the visitor's space.

In my mind it works a lot better. A car permanently in the visitor's space is now gone. My space is empty when I return to it.

From reading these boards, I am aware anyone who gets a fine can ignore it But like I said it seems to have improved matters.

I would like to offer a perhaps more balanced view as a leaseholder in a block of flats with an allocated parking space and a private parking company. 

First, I understand your annoyance when somebody parked in your space. Many of us are very aware that part of the reason for the parking company to take over our parking space is exactly the complaints that people park in our legally allocated space. It was/is a pain and it should not happen. 

However, is introducing the parking company the best approach? Perhaps not. The major problem is that these parking companies indiscriminately penalise residents, people like you and me.

If you read enough cases on this forum when it comes to Residential Parking (please do not confuse these cases with non-residential cases), you will see most people who received charges are genuine 'owner' of their demised parking space. The value of these tickets worth hundreds of pounds. For what? They had a courtesy car when their own car went to service, or their 'permit' slipped down due to the heat/cheap quality of those stickers. They were sued even when they proved that they own the space and their full lease shows their rights to park there. This could be you and me. 

Has parking company resolved the parking issue? It does not in my block. We have people parked in the pavements, restricting our access in and out of the estate. This is partially because they have two cars in one household and they need to park. Can you ask them to get rid of one car? What if this is their livelihood? Have these parking company done anything to genuinely manage it? Of course not. It's fine for them to take control of the parking space of you and me, but they dare not do so when it comes to council-owned space. 

The other side of the story is we have quite a few residents who do not have a car. People who have a second car could have talk to these car-free residents, renting their space for a monthly fee. This happened years ago with my husband's grandma, who rented out her space to her neighbour. Nowadays, we prefer to make a complain to a third party rather than speaking to the neighbours. 

What is the alternative? A traffic cone will do the trick. That's what my dad did for years. Placing a cone in his spot when he leaves and removing it when he parks. 

It seems that we voluntarily/mistakenly surrender our rights to these private parking companies, assigning 'authority' to them, regarding them as "authority" who is no more than militants in their way of handling matters and their "charges/commercial contracts" as "fines." We are imagining a perfect world by giving up our rights. In most cases, a simple solution such as a traffic cone, and a friendly chat with your neighbours, can solve the problem.

You may argue, well, that's the dubious practices of these private parking companies. Yes, if you read posts here, you will see that that's why people are fighting for - activating the private parking act, although you may disagree with their approaches or presentations. They try to improve things for you and me, so one day, when your permit falls through accidentally, you know that you are not alone and know how to get justice. 

When I lived in Scotland, we had unallocated parking and a community WhatsApp group. People spoke to neighbours, shaming those who parked atrociously, asking people to move their cars, and reminding people when their headlights were still on or window was left open. Council tried to impose parking and we rejected it. 

You do not need these private parking companies. You need a community of neighbours and a simple solution such as a traffic cone. 

Bobb12345

lr1277 said:

I am going to offer something from the other side. Feel free to take it or leave it.

I live in a block of flats near a town centre with an assigned parking space. There is no barrier to enter the car park. So literally anybody could come and park in our space.

I once went to the gym and when I returned a few hours later, a builder had parked in my spot and point blank refused to move when I told him he was in my space. My space apparently was close to the flat he was working in. I didn't want to park in anyone elses space so went and parked off-site. That was a pain.

Also there is one visitor's spot and a car would stay there for weeks at a time. Then be replaced with another car which would stay for weeks at a time. Speculation was that it was some kind of car dealer using the space for storage. This annoyed many of the other residents, especially the directors (see next sentence).

All the owners can apply to be directors of the block. Only a few do so. The directors in conjunction with the managing agent to hire a parking company. Now every owner gets a badge. You can get a replacement badge for a cost. Also contractors can come and park with a code given to them by the owner/tenant. A resident can get a code from the parking company for free. It has to be a company who can be contacted. This scheme is not for friends to park. If you want friends to park, you can buy a book temporary permits, though I think this might be only for the visitor's space.

In my mind it works a lot better. A car permanently in the visitor's space is now gone. My space is empty when I return to it.

From reading these boards, I am aware anyone who gets a fine can ignore it But like I said it seems to have improved matters.

I appreciate the above and I suspect that was why the parking company was introduced. However, in my case there IS a barrier that is keyfob controlled, and additionally due process was not followed and no residents were consulted regards the parking company. If residents had been consulted and there was a majority in favour of the parking company, then fair enough, but they weren't and it isn't. 

Coupon-mad

PPCs have no place in residential car parks, ever, IMHO. The way they operate is so abhorrent and socially irresponsible that no residents should accept this crap.

Bobb12345

Coupon-mad said:

PPCs have no place in residential car parks, ever, IMHO. The way they operate is so abhorrent and socially irresponsible that no residents should accept this crap.

I need some further advice on this. The block of flats I live in has introduced parking controls (on a site with a barrier controlled entrance). They allege they were introduced prior to me buying the lease, a number of years ago and according to the building directors, leaseholders were consulted. The parking control company doesn't charge a fee. 

Thus, the parking control company was introduced. However, there is nothing in the lease of my flat that states I need to display a parking permit in my vehicle, nor does it state that the parking control company will come round and issue an 'invoice' if the permit is not displayed. I was also told that the parking company effectively targets the residents and leaseholders because they were the ones causing the issues and not anyone from outside. How is this right? How can I be penalised for parking in my own parking space? 

This issue has been raised with the building directors and they got very very angry when it was mentioned, someone accused me of 'quoting the magna carter'. I simply stated that there is nothing in the lease that states the permit needs displaying in my car for a parking space I already own. They also stated that other developments around have parking controls. I don't care about what is happening with other sites, I care about what is happening here and as far as I'm concerned this hasn't been done correctly. They also said that this sort of thing wouldn't be included in any lease. Surely this is wrong? 

What can I do in order to get this parking control company removed from the site. The directors have said that they won't ask leaseholders if it's still needed (even though it was allegedly introduced 8 years ago). What else can be done? If nothing else can be done, then I will have to accept it, but I won't be happy. 

Coupon-mad

There's lots and lots of case law to support your position, such as:
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/court-of-appeal-delivers-important-judgment-in-holland-park-dispute-as-to-parking-rights

The parking control company doesn't charge a fee. 

They never do. And you realise WHY this protection racket MO is the problem?

Anyway as a first step:

Ask to see the consultation and results from 8 years ago. Does it comply with the law? As stated in Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, the freeholder (party to the lease wanting to impose something like this which varies or interferes with the lease rights) must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders with no more than 10% objecting, or in the case of nine or less leaseholders, all but one must agree.

If they are in breach then get together with other leaseholders and formally complain like this example that worked:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75773273/#Comment_75773273

If that fails, raise a complaint with the Leaseholders Association.

If that fails: see if one of the leaseholders (you?) has free legal cover as part of your home insurance? Very handy if you do. There are one or two posters currently suing their managing agents/parking firms, you know. One might be @h2g2 (trying to recall!).

Bobb12345

Coupon-mad said:

There's lots and lots of case law to support your position, such as:
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/court-of-appeal-delivers-important-judgment-in-holland-park-dispute-as-to-parking-rights

The parking control company doesn't charge a fee. 

They never do. And you realise WHY this protection racket MO is the problem?

Anyway as a first step:

Ask to see the consultation and results from 8 years ago. Does it comply with the law? As stated in Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, the freeholder (party to the lease wanting to impose something like this which varies or interferes with the lease rights) must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders with no more than 10% objecting, or in the case of nine or less leaseholders, all but one must agree.

If they are in breach then get together with other leaseholders and formally complain like this example that worked:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75773273/#Comment_75773273

If that fails, raise a complaint with the Leaseholders Association.

If that fails: see if one of the leaseholders (you?) has free legal cover as part of your home insurance? Very handy if you do. There are one or two posters currently suing their managing agents/parking firms, you know. One might be @h2g2 (trying to recall!).

Many thanks for getting back to me.

After attending the Annual General Meeting last night between leaseholders, building directors and managing agent I don't think there is a huge amount of negativity against the parking company. (I bought it up as one of the points). Admittedly the meeting wasn't well attended, but those in attendance seemed to think that having the parking company there was good for the building and are happy to display badges in the cars. Obviously, I'm not but it appears I'm a lone voice. 

I think there are in total about 50 flats in the building. If I was to take further steps, as I doubt the managing agent or building directors are going to assist me much further (I got accused of quoting the magna carter, although what that has to do with parking controls is beyond me). 

I could, I guess, write to all the flats asking them directly what they think of the parking company. What would I put in such a letter to them? I'm just not really sure what to do, but if I'm the lone voice speaking out against these cowboys, there perhaps isn't much else I can do. Thank you again. 

h2g2

Coupon-mad said:

One might be @h2g2 (trying to recall!).

One of them is me, yes! My thread is here.

I have the slight advantage of living at the place before parking controls were implemented, which means I have records that I raised concerns before ticketing started. Looking back over this thread, it looks like you are in a similar situation.

One angle of attack might be to raise an objection with the parking company themselves, showing them your lease and deed, and asserting that you are the owner & occupier of your parking space and that you do not consent to them issuing parking charges on your land, and further that you do not consent to them offering a contract to park on your land.

When I did this they opted my space out (which they have generally respected so far) but were clear it was a courtesy, and said they did have the legal right to enforce charges on me and my space.

If that happens it might be worth escalating to their trade association (BPA or IPC), which won't get you anywhere but their response may contain some rope to hang them with later.

After that you can raise a concern with the DLVA saying that you are the landowner, but someone else has contracted a PPC to "manage" your land without your consent. Ask them to withhold keeper details for charges on that land unless they can prove they have consent from the landowner to operate.

Also ask them to investigate a breach of Protection of Freedoms Act Schedule 4, and a breach of the shared code of conduct that forms part of the KADOE contract. If you took the step of complaining to the IPC / BPA you can also raise that you complained to them as well and that they refused to enforce a substantial part of the code of conduct and endorsed their member breaching the law as well.

If all else fails, I went to Constestor Legal, and paid £2500 (which we anticipate winning back) to use the court system to kick them out. Progress is on its way.

Coupon-mad

Bobb12345 said:

Coupon-mad said:

There's lots and lots of case law to support your position, such as:
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/court-of-appeal-delivers-important-judgment-in-holland-park-dispute-as-to-parking-rights

The parking control company doesn't charge a fee. 

They never do. And you realise WHY this protection racket MO is the problem?

Anyway as a first step:

Ask to see the consultation and results from 8 years ago. Does it comply with the law? As stated in Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, the freeholder (party to the lease wanting to impose something like this which varies or interferes with the lease rights) must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders with no more than 10% objecting, or in the case of nine or less leaseholders, all but one must agree.

If they are in breach then get together with other leaseholders and formally complain like this example that worked:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75773273/#Comment_75773273

If that fails, raise a complaint with the Leaseholders Association.

If that fails: see if one of the leaseholders (you?) has free legal cover as part of your home insurance? Very handy if you do. There are one or two posters currently suing their managing agents/parking firms, you know. One might be @h2g2 (trying to recall!).

Many thanks for getting back to me.

After attending the Annual General Meeting last night between leaseholders, building directors and managing agent I don't think there is a huge amount of negativity against the parking company. (I bought it up as one of the points). Admittedly the meeting wasn't well attended, but those in attendance seemed to think that having the parking company there was good for the building and are happy to display badges in the cars. Obviously, I'm not but it appears I'm a lone voice. 

I think there are in total about 50 flats in the building. If I was to take further steps, as I doubt the managing agent or building directors are going to assist me much further (I got accused of quoting the magna carter, although what that has to do with parking controls is beyond me). 

I could, I guess, write to all the flats asking them directly what they think of the parking company. What would I put in such a letter to them? I'm just not really sure what to do, but if I'm the lone voice speaking out against these cowboys, there perhaps isn't much else I can do. Thank you again. 

But the first step I suggested is what to do first. Ask to see the vote numbers & records about what was asked of whom (how many were consulted) and the response rate. Chances are the 'vote' was unlawful in which case you then take it to the Leaseholders Association.

None of that requires other leaseholders to be on board. You could expose and unpick the decision from 8 years ago as unlawful just by getting hold of the records of that supposed 'vote'.

What I suspect they did was a show of hands at an AGM. But with 50 flats they'd need a complete survey with at least 75% consenting and no more than 10% objecting.

I'm telling you they didn't do it right.

I'm also telling you that more than 10% of the leaseholders will be with you if you ask them. If you put a letter in every door pointing out that this variation of the lease was unlawful (and that by operating your land as a commercial protection racket free, no wonder residents and visitors are being targeted with £100 PCNs) I am betting that you'll get at least ten agreeing with you and you only need five to kill off a proper vote, if the MA now tries that.

Tell the leaseholders that the unsolicited business being run also means the PPC is offering their spaces for £100 per day. Had they realised this? Operations like this can wreck flat saleability & prices. Lots of people eill never even look at a flat with a PPC attacking residents' right to peaceful enjoyment. I'd never even view a flat with a PPC in the car park. I'm far from alone.

Find out about that vote then send a letter through every door. Read other threads such as h2g2's example and the successful one I linked that got PCM removed immediately after the leaseholders wrote to the MA (example letter is right there).

All you need to know is there and on other threads like it. Even how to word the letter to other leaseholders. This is tried & tested. We have seen this hundreds/thousands of times over the years here.

Did you read the case law I linked? The recent Duchess of Bedford case? The residents there removed the parking restrictions after being wrongly inflicted with an aggressive ticketing 'scheme' for over 15 or 20 years, IIRC.

Gather contact details of like-minded leaseholders. Then decide next steps together, to kick out the PPC.

Bobb12345

Coupon-mad said:

Bobb12345 said:

Coupon-mad said:

There's lots and lots of case law to support your position, such as:
https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/court-of-appeal-delivers-important-judgment-in-holland-park-dispute-as-to-parking-rights

The parking control company doesn't charge a fee. 

They never do. And you realise WHY this protection racket MO is the problem?

Anyway as a first step:

Ask to see the consultation and results from 8 years ago. Does it comply with the law? As stated in Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, the freeholder (party to the lease wanting to impose something like this which varies or interferes with the lease rights) must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders with no more than 10% objecting, or in the case of nine or less leaseholders, all but one must agree.

If they are in breach then get together with other leaseholders and formally complain like this example that worked:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75773273/#Comment_75773273

If that fails, raise a complaint with the Leaseholders Association.

If that fails: see if one of the leaseholders (you?) has free legal cover as part of your home insurance? Very handy if you do. There are one or two posters currently suing their managing agents/parking firms, you know. One might be @h2g2 (trying to recall!).

Many thanks for getting back to me.

After attending the Annual General Meeting last night between leaseholders, building directors and managing agent I don't think there is a huge amount of negativity against the parking company. (I bought it up as one of the points). Admittedly the meeting wasn't well attended, but those in attendance seemed to think that having the parking company there was good for the building and are happy to display badges in the cars. Obviously, I'm not but it appears I'm a lone voice. 

I think there are in total about 50 flats in the building. If I was to take further steps, as I doubt the managing agent or building directors are going to assist me much further (I got accused of quoting the magna carter, although what that has to do with parking controls is beyond me). 

I could, I guess, write to all the flats asking them directly what they think of the parking company. What would I put in such a letter to them? I'm just not really sure what to do, but if I'm the lone voice speaking out against these cowboys, there perhaps isn't much else I can do. Thank you again. 

But the first step I suggested is what to do first. Ask to see the vote numbers & records about what was asked of whom (how many were consulted) and the response rate. Chances are the 'vote' was unlawful in which case you then take it to the Leaseholders Association.

None of that requires other leaseholders to be on board. You could expose and unpick the decision from 8 years ago as unlawful just by getting hold of the records of that supposed 'vote'.

What I suspect they did was a show of hands at an AGM. But with 50 flats they'd need a complete survey with at least 75% consenting and no more than 10% objecting.

I'm telling you they didn't do it right.

I'm also telling you that more than 10% of the leaseholders will be with you if you ask them. If you put a letter in every door pointing out that this variation of the lease was unlawful (and that by operating your land as a commercial protection racket free, no wonder residents and visitors are being targeted with £100 PCNs) I am betting that you'll get at least ten agreeing with you and you only need five to kill off a proper vote, if the MA now tries that.

Tell the leaseholders that the unsolicited business being run also means the PPC is offering their spaces for £100 per day. Had they realised this? Operations like this can wreck flat saleability & prices. Lots of people eill never even look at a flat with a PPC attacking residents' right to peaceful enjoyment. I'd never even view a flat with a PPC in the car park. I'm far from alone.

Find out about that vote then send a letter through every door. Read other threads such as h2g2's example and the successful one I linked that got PCM removed immediately after the leaseholders wrote to the MA (example letter is right there).

All you need to know is there and on other threads like it. Even how to word the letter to other leaseholders. This is tried & tested. We have seen this hundreds/thousands of times over the years here.

Did you read the case law I linked? The recent Duchess of Bedford case? The residents there removed the parking restrictions after being wrongly inflicted with an aggressive ticketing 'scheme' for over 15 or 20 years, IIRC.

Gather contact details of like-minded leaseholders. Then decide next steps together, to kick out the PPC.

Many thanks for this. I will ask the Property Management Company to contact the Building Diretors for the information on the vote, as a first step. The Building Directors swore at me the last time I bought up what happened, and although they say Leaseholders were consulted, they didn't explain why. We didn't get that far, as they just started shouting that I bought up parking again. 

I'll get that information, then will contact the Leaseholders Association, and go from there. I don't have the time for a protracted legal fight or anything like that, I work long hours, and don't have the spare energy to put too much into this. If I was retired, I would. Anyways, I really appreciate the help and advice. I'll ask the question and go from there. Many thanks again.