Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • tbarson1
    • By tbarson1 6th Apr 18, 8:27 AM
    • 72Posts
    • 5Thanks
    tbarson1
    Lease & Pets Major Issue
    • #1
    • 6th Apr 18, 8:27 AM
    Lease & Pets Major Issue 6th Apr 18 at 8:27 AM
    Dear All,


    I have a major problem and do not know what to do. I have lived in an apartment for 1 year now and have had a dog since I moved in.
    The other day I was asked by the management company if I had a dog which I thought I was allowed. However how they worded the email made it sound like you could not have a dog. I purchased the apartment on the basis of this as the solicitors stated to me that they had read through the paperwork and restrictions attached to the property and it does not appear that dogs and domestic animals are not allowed. I don’t know what to do!

Page 4
    • tbarson1
    • By tbarson1 6th Apr 18, 9:21 PM
    • 72 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tbarson1
    What you are describing is a application for an injunction. Not an action for breach of the lease (which would only result in damages).

    It is sometimes possible for the landlord to get an injunction. But there are some important caveats:

    - Even if the lease is clearly being breached, that is not enough for an injunction. Injunctions are hard to get and there are other criteria which need to be satisfied.

    - Getting an injunction is expensive. Injunctions cannot be obtained through the small claims process.

    That is why, in the case you linked to, the initial hearing was 3 days long. And that was before the two appeals that were heard.

    The freeholders burned over £100k of legal fees in that case (the details are public), and will be tens of thousands out of pocket. It was a highly exceptional case driven by a personal vendetta of the tenant directors of the leasehold management company.

    I suppose its possible the Op could end up in the same position if this kept getting escalated, but extremely unlikely I think.
    Originally posted by steampowered
    I live in a small city and the man co don’t have that kind if funding
    • Aylesbury Duck
    • By Aylesbury Duck 6th Apr 18, 9:31 PM
    • 1,852 Posts
    • 2,493 Thanks
    Aylesbury Duck
    No not at all I was just advised incorrectly this if I had to move I would seek costs.idont see how your ridiculous comments help. I cane in here for advise not sarcasm. If you do not have anything constructive to say then do not post here.
    Originally posted by tbarson1
    It would help you get advice if you could answer the questions posed in various posts, including in post #55. My sarcasm was in direct response to your response to G_M's closing remarks. He quite clearly said:
    I'm afraid I believe that

    a) you do not understand the process by which leases are created, bought and sold
    b) you therefore almost certainly misunderstood what the solicitor said and/or the implications
    To which your response was:
    Regardless the solicitor said Pets were allowed.....
    So, how do you expect to benefit from the advice people are giving when you don't listen and keep repeating "the solicitor said..." at every opportunity?

    And I'll post as I like, thanks, as long as it's within the forum rules. Feel free to block me if you wish. I won't be upset. If challenged, I'll just say I'm using my friend's account and it doesn't belong to me.
    • InterestedParty2018
    • By InterestedParty2018 6th Apr 18, 9:34 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 24 Thanks
    InterestedParty2018
    tbarson1, you came to this forum to seek free advice/direction/information/opinion. This particular forum is visited by tenants, owners, surveyors, solicitors, estate agents, managing agents etc, all with their experience, be it personal or professional.

    I suggest you review the comments and tally up the opinions. Those that believe you have a right to keep a pet and grounds for action against your solictors, versus those that believe you have no grounds for either.
    • NeilCr
    • By NeilCr 6th Apr 18, 9:36 PM
    • 1,708 Posts
    • 2,291 Thanks
    NeilCr
    What you are describing is a application for an injunction. Not an action for breach of the lease (which would only result in damages).

    It is sometimes possible for the landlord to get an injunction. But there are some important caveats:

    - Even if the lease is clearly being breached, that is not enough for an injunction. Injunctions are hard to get and there are other criteria which need to be satisfied.

    - Getting an injunction is expensive. Injunctions cannot be obtained through the small claims process.

    That is why, in the case you linked to, the initial hearing was 3 days long. And that was before the two appeals that were heard.

    The freeholders burned over £100k of legal fees in that case (the details are public), and will be tens of thousands out of pocket. It was a highly exceptional case driven by a personal vendetta of the tenant directors of the leasehold management company.

    I suppose its possible the Op could end up in the same position if this kept getting escalated, but extremely unlikely I think.
    Originally posted by steampowered
    Another link with a few comments on what it means for leaseholders and what you should do if you have a pet in this situation. To be clear this isn't aimed at the OP

    http://www.bishopandsewell.co.uk/leaseholder-to-remove-dog-from-flat/

    As a director of our estate I don't have that much sympathy with the Kuehns if I'm honest based on this report

    We have the same covenant re pets for our leaseholders. I am an animal lover and my natural instinct is to agree to requests for pets to be allowed in the flats. However, you run the risk of falling foul of other leaseholders and you have to be aware of their views - and the practicalities.

    A couple of years ago we had an enquiry from a prospective purchaser of one of the flats. She (sensibly) wanted clarification of how we would deal with her situation. She wanted to buy a flat with no outside access and she had one cat and two dogs. Or the other way round! We, unanimously, said no because we thought it was too much - and there was a real risk of disturbance for the other neighbours - something which, of course, is hard to judge in advance.

    If we'd said yes and the animals became a nuisance I am well aware of the pressure we would have been under from other flat dwellers. And we may have ended in court. And it would have been an unpleasant experience for all concerned.

    In this, as has been said, lying low is the best bet. Neighbours haven't complained so I'd be surprised if the manco took it much further. Lying to them wasn't the best idea, though
    Last edited by NeilCr; 06-04-2018 at 9:50 PM.
    • steampowered
    • By steampowered 6th Apr 18, 9:41 PM
    • 2,490 Posts
    • 2,409 Thanks
    steampowered
    So become a tenant of the solicitor.

    I don't see how you proving the solicitor was wrong - if indeed you can - will help you. What do you expect him to do to make amends? Adopt your dog?
    Originally posted by Aylesbury Duck
    The Op's conveyancer/solicitors owed the Op a duty of care.

    As it seems they gave the Op an incorrect answer to a very specific question, they will be liable for professional negligence to pay costs incurred by the Op as a result of their wrong advice.
    • tbarson1
    • By tbarson1 9th Apr 18, 1:24 PM
    • 72 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tbarson1
    Can you pm me steam? Tried to but it won!!!8217;t send my end
    • Gilead
    • By Gilead 9th Apr 18, 2:47 PM
    • 65 Posts
    • 128 Thanks
    Gilead
    If you are going down the negligence route you need to have evidence that they advised you that pets were permitted. If you don't have that then there is no case to answer.

    Negligence happens, but because you remember a conversation a certain way does not mean that is enough never mind correct.
    • tbarson1
    • By tbarson1 9th Apr 18, 2:51 PM
    • 72 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tbarson1
    If you are going down the negligence route you need to have evidence that they advised you that pets were permitted. If you don't have that then there is no case to answer.

    Negligence happens, but because you remember a conversation a certain way does not mean that is enough never mind correct.
    Originally posted by Gilead
    I have the email which says “I have read through the paperwork and the restrictions and it does not appear that digs and domestic animals are not allowed”

    The lease totally contradicts this
    • gingercordial
    • By gingercordial 9th Apr 18, 3:27 PM
    • 1,143 Posts
    • 1,193 Thanks
    gingercordial
    OP, what do you want to happen here?

    The solicitor being wrong will not mean you can keep your dog if the management company insist you can't have one.

    You are very unlikely to get the management company to agree to amend your lease, but they may ignore it if (as you say) the dog is not a nuisance. The solicitor being wrong won't help you either way.

    You've suffered no loss at this point as you have not incurred any costs. Therefore you have nothing to claim back from the solicitor. Wait and see if anything else happens, and keep the e-mail in case you need it in future.

    If what you are really after is compensation, I would think that's pretty unlikely at this stage and even if they offered you something it would almost certainly include terms that this was the end of their liability which you really wouldn't want to accept in case you do suffer losses in future and want to claim those.
    • tbarson1
    • By tbarson1 9th Apr 18, 4:24 PM
    • 72 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tbarson1
    I am not planning on doing anything currently. It is negligence in terms of incorrect information given. I would only seek compensation if I was forced to have the dog removed and had to move as a result.
    • need an answer
    • By need an answer 9th Apr 18, 4:40 PM
    • 409 Posts
    • 477 Thanks
    need an answer
    However in order to get to the point that the dog were "removed and you forced to move" there is likely to have been a costly legal battle on both sides.
    Would you be expecting your solicitor to fund a portion of this or what compensation would you deem adequate?

    It is also worth remembering that the management company whom which you would propose to have this dispute is in part funded by yourself as a leaseholder.
    They potentially have only minimal funds put aside for challenging leaseholders who don't comply with the lease.Ultimatly if you were to take them to the max you would end up paying at least a portion of their costs by default being a leaseholder and potentially prove yourself very unpopular with your neighbours who as leaseholders also would have to foot the bill.

    Whilst it may not seem a huge thing for you to keep a pet and potentially none of your near neighbours object what it does do is show that there can be little regard for upholding any element of the lease.

    So presumably if there I a clause in the lease regarding an aspect you are unhappy with someone breaking the terms there is very little you can do to prevent it if you yourself are doing likewise
    in S 31 T 20 F 42
    out S 36 T 24 F 32
    2017 -32
    • tbarson1
    • By tbarson1 10th Apr 18, 8:43 AM
    • 72 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tbarson1
    However in order to get to the point that the dog were "removed and you forced to move" there is likely to have been a costly legal battle on both sides.
    Would you be expecting your solicitor to fund a portion of this or what compensation would you deem adequate?

    It is also worth remembering that the management company whom which you would propose to have this dispute is in part funded by yourself as a leaseholder.
    They potentially have only minimal funds put aside for challenging leaseholders who don't comply with the lease.Ultimatly if you were to take them to the max you would end up paying at least a portion of their costs by default being a leaseholder and potentially prove yourself very unpopular with your neighbours who as leaseholders also would have to foot the bill.

    Whilst it may not seem a huge thing for you to keep a pet and potentially none of your near neighbours object what it does do is show that there can be little regard for upholding any element of the lease.

    So presumably if there I a clause in the lease regarding an aspect you are unhappy with someone breaking the terms there is very little you can do to prevent it if you yourself are doing likewise
    Originally posted by need an answer


    Thanks, so basically unless the issue is raised again I think I'll just keep myself to myself.
    • steampowered
    • By steampowered 10th Apr 18, 10:56 AM
    • 2,490 Posts
    • 2,409 Thanks
    steampowered
    So presumably if there I a clause in the lease regarding an aspect you are unhappy with someone breaking the terms there is very little you can do to prevent it if you yourself are doing likewise
    Originally posted by need an answer
    I think it comes down to materiality and the landlord's attitude at the end of the day.

    Lots of people breach their lease. A classic example is people parking in the wrong space on a residential estate, in breach of parking regulations usually expressly referred to in the lease.

    Yet you wouldn't expect to be taken to court over such breaches - though the landlord could if it wanted to - nor would a court grant an injunction, even if the landlord proved the tenant had breached the lease.

    If the dog is causing an issue, and the landlord cares enough to fund a legal dispute, then they will pursue it.

    Otherwise, they won't.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,707Posts Today

7,824Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • It's the start of mini MSE's half term. In order to be the best daddy possible, Im stopping work and going off line? https://t.co/kwjvtd75YU

  • RT @shellsince1982: @MartinSLewis thanx to your email I have just saved myself £222 by taking a SIM only deal for £7.50 a month and keeping?

  • Today's Friday twitter poll: An important question, building on yesterday's important discussions: Which is the best bit of the pizza...

  • Follow Martin