Abuse of residential gated car park
Discussion
Ok. I live in a similar type development. Each resident has 1 parking bay however only half are marked up mine is not my neighbours is.
All the residents know which is their bay and all barring a polish bunch who have moved into one of the properties abides by simple respect and don't use other peoples bays without asking first.
If one of the residents has a builder coming by on a given day and needs a bay due to their being no visitors bays they ask their neighbour if the builder would be able to use their bay.
Our complex is a bit complex as there are two parking areas managed by two different companies/groups.
In your position I would suggest option 1 would be to mark all bays. Option two the managing agent lets the troublemaker know that if he continues to abuse the parking area he will have his access removed as I believe their is a rule built into most of these agreements stating subject to change/administration by management etc.
All the residents know which is their bay and all barring a polish bunch who have moved into one of the properties abides by simple respect and don't use other peoples bays without asking first.
If one of the residents has a builder coming by on a given day and needs a bay due to their being no visitors bays they ask their neighbour if the builder would be able to use their bay.
Our complex is a bit complex as there are two parking areas managed by two different companies/groups.
In your position I would suggest option 1 would be to mark all bays. Option two the managing agent lets the troublemaker know that if he continues to abuse the parking area he will have his access removed as I believe their is a rule built into most of these agreements stating subject to change/administration by management etc.
James P said:
I'm only looking at this on my 'phone so apologies if I've missed something but one flat - one space is presumably in the lease. Using more than one space would breach the terms of the lease so unless the accountant stops, the management company could terminate the lease? Any legal types think this might work?
a) The courts wouldn't do itb) The management firm would not have the balls.
But. Gives me an idea. If he has a mortgage (Land Registry search), write to lender stating that he is breaching the terms of the lease, he is aware of this and the management company is considering forfeiture. Lender will no be a happy bunny and words will be had, such as the threat repayable on demand maybe
Funk said:
Exactly this. Will solve the problem immediately.
Bearing in mind:stroberaver said:
The car park is also not full as many residents do not have a car
and:stroberaver said:
Most of the flats are rented out on a short-term basis - it's rare for anyone to live there more than a couple of years, and so most people there don't give a s
t. There's only myself and one or two other involved owners/occupiers who are fed up with the situation and want it resolved
..what do you think are the chances of residents actually being arsed to put the parking posts up when they're not there?t. There's only myself and one or two other involved owners/occupiers who are fed up with the situation and want it resolved Funk said:
Six Fiend said:
Number each space for the relevant flat.
Locking post for each space.
Each flat gets keys to the post in their space.
Job done.
Exactly this. Will solve the problem immediately.Locking post for each space.
Each flat gets keys to the post in their space.
Job done.
surveyor said:
But it won't as legally the accountant is able to park in whichever space he likes, unless all the residents sign a deed of variation, determining a specific space per lease.
Yes. This is why I asked how the spaces are allocated and this is why non-allocated spaces are a PITA and open to abuse. One solution may be parking permits. One flat, one permit. Private enforcement company.
Another solution is keying the f$$$$$s car. Not that I recommend you do that of course.
You can only mark the spaces and have bollards if the leases allow the freeholder to make 'management rules' for the better running of the site and that probably depends on the age of the leases.
Older leases tend not to have that or is too vague.
Good idea about advising the lenders. Mention the subletting at the same time. He may have consent to sublet or he may not. Does he need the freeholder's consent to sublet?
Go to the Land Registry website to get a copy of his tile details.
Older leases tend not to have that or is too vague.
Good idea about advising the lenders. Mention the subletting at the same time. He may have consent to sublet or he may not. Does he need the freeholder's consent to sublet?
Go to the Land Registry website to get a copy of his tile details.
Do away with visitors' spaces and write into the deeds that only vehicles registered to addresses on the premises may park in the car park , owners/tennants permitted to nominate ONE vehicle per flat ; any vehicle not on the list liable to be removed by private parking enforcement firm and RK invoiced for removal/storage/release costs .
James P said:
I'm only looking at this on my 'phone so apologies if I've missed something but one flat - one space is presumably in the lease. Using more than one space would breach the terms of the lease so unless the accountant stops, the management company could terminate the lease? Any legal types think this might work?
I've already discussed the lease with the managing agent, and we're in agreement that he's in breach of it. Lease states one space per property. Presumably he rents his flat out including the space (although possibly not, as it would still be rentable without the parking space due to the location). Either way, his staff and clients have no right to park there.The problem, according to the managing agent, is that although the lease specifies what is allowed, it doesn't specify the consequences of breaching it. I find this hard to accept, as it surely means everything in the lease is unenforceable and junk. Or maybe it's just the managing agent making excuses for not taking the accountant to task over it. Is it normal for leases to not state the consequences of not obeying them? Or is it just assumed?
surveyor said:
If he has a mortgage (Land Registry search), write to lender stating that he is breaching the terms of the lease, he is aware of this and the management company is considering forfeiture. Lender will no be a happy bunny and words will be had, such as the threat repayable on demand maybe
Thanks, that sounds like a good avenue to explore!Deva Link said:
..what do you think are the chances of residents actually being arsed to put the parking posts up when they're not there?
Precisely. It's generally a decent and smart place with respectable people, but we do get the occasional tenant who can't even cope with the concept of putting their rubbish sacks inside the huge metal wheely bins. However people are moving in and out all the time, especially the students, and the posts won't be used properly. Some will accidentally take their keys with them when they move out. Some will lose them and not report it because they don't need the space. Some posts will be left permanently up, and some down. The arrangement of the car park (in the middle there are two rows of 5/6 spaces lined up nose-to-nose) means that even if you illegally parked in a space and the owner pulled the post up behind you, you could probably manoeuvre out of it due to the empty spaces around you and in front of you!Numbering the spaces and changing the deeds, as surveyor says, will be costly and time consuming and require everyone's consent. That consent will never be forthcoming, and it would rob everyone else of the freedom to use the car park appropriately.
I'm not clear however on where the freeholder comes into this. As the lease is an agreement between the leaseholder and the freeholder, does the Management Company have to instruct the Managing Agent to take action on behalf of the freeholder? Or discuss with the freeholder beforehand and get their consent/backing? I'm not a property person so I don't know the ins and outs of all these things.
creampuff said:
Another solution is keying the f$$$$$s car. Not that I recommend you do that of course.
Of course not. It would be terrible to suggest such a thing. However, suggesting such a terrible thing is futile, as the accountant's offices are directly opposite the gates, and they all park where their cars can be seen 
, except for the accountant himself. I also in no way ever dream of storing a beat up Land Rover Defender somewhere else and occasionally briefly turning up in it to park very close to their cars in high wind. Cos y'know, those doors can't half snap out of your hand in the wind.Deva Link said:
A frequency jammer would be good fun.
Now this could be fun. How would one go about determining the mode of operation of the blipper? It's just a solid plastic case in the shape of a smooth pebble, with no transparent bits anywhere. It's got a pretty decent range, too - doesn't have to be line of sight. Radio frequency, perhaps?Deva Link said:
..what do you think are the chances of residents actually being arsed to put the parking posts up when they're not there?
Semi-game theory:The more residents that are arsed to put the parking posts, the more the interlopers will be concentrated in the remaining spaces, increasing the motivation to put the parking posts.
stroberaver said:
James P said:
I'm only looking at this on my 'phone so apologies if I've missed something but one flat - one space is presumably in the lease. Using more than one space would breach the terms of the lease so unless the accountant stops, the management company could terminate the lease? Any legal types think this might work?
I've already discussed the lease with the managing agent, and we're in agreement that he's in breach of it. Lease states one space per property. Presumably he rents his flat out including the space (although possibly not, as it would still be rentable without the parking space due to the location). Either way, his staff and clients have no right to park there.The problem, according to the managing agent, is that although the lease specifies what is allowed, it doesn't specify the consequences of breaching it. I find this hard to accept, as it surely means everything in the lease is unenforceable and junk. Or maybe it's just the managing agent making excuses for not taking the accountant to task over it. Is it normal for leases to not state the consequences of not obeying them? Or is it just assumed?
surveyor said:
If he has a mortgage (Land Registry search), write to lender stating that he is breaching the terms of the lease, he is aware of this and the management company is considering forfeiture. Lender will no be a happy bunny and words will be had, such as the threat repayable on demand maybe
Thanks, that sounds like a good avenue to explore!Deva Link said:
..what do you think are the chances of residents actually being arsed to put the parking posts up when they're not there?
Precisely. It's generally a decent and smart place with respectable people, but we do get the occasional tenant who can't even cope with the concept of putting their rubbish sacks inside the huge metal wheely bins. However people are moving in and out all the time, especially the students, and the posts won't be used properly. Some will accidentally take their keys with them when they move out. Some will lose them and not report it because they don't need the space. Some posts will be left permanently up, and some down. The arrangement of the car park (in the middle there are two rows of 5/6 spaces lined up nose-to-nose) means that even if you illegally parked in a space and the owner pulled the post up behind you, you could probably manoeuvre out of it due to the empty spaces around you and in front of you!Numbering the spaces and changing the deeds, as surveyor says, will be costly and time consuming and require everyone's consent. That consent will never be forthcoming, and it would rob everyone else of the freedom to use the car park appropriately.
I'm not clear however on where the freeholder comes into this. As the lease is an agreement between the leaseholder and the freeholder, does the Management Company have to instruct the Managing Agent to take action on behalf of the freeholder? Or discuss with the freeholder beforehand and get their consent/backing? I'm not a property person so I don't know the ins and outs of all these things.
creampuff said:
Another solution is keying the f$$$$$s car. Not that I recommend you do that of course.
Of course not. It would be terrible to suggest such a thing. However, suggesting such a terrible thing is futile, as the accountant's offices are directly opposite the gates, and they all park where their cars can be seen , except for the accountant himself. I also in no way ever dream of storing a beat up Land Rover Defender somewhere else and occasionally briefly turning up in it to park very close to their cars in high wind. Cos y'know, those doors can't half snap out of your hand in the wind.Deva Link said:
A frequency jammer would be good fun.
Now this could be fun. How would one go about determining the mode of operation of the blipper? It's just a solid plastic case in the shape of a smooth pebble, with no transparent bits anywhere. It's got a pretty decent range, too - doesn't have to be line of sight. Radio frequency, perhaps?What you really need is a more sophisticated gate. One that will monitor the pass used, and will only allow one car in for each pass. I'm sure it can be done, but no doubt at a cost.
The usual ultimate consequence of failing to abide by the terms of the lease is that you lose the lease. After a lengthy court battle, I'd assume.
If the managing company is in agreement that the fu$%^r is in breach of the lease, they should be writing to him.
You could also wait for one of the staff or clients to park there and tell them to get f$%^ed. I doubt that the fu$%er having their staff and clients getting told they are parked contrary to the fu£$ers lease is going to reflect well on the fu^*£r.
If the managing company is in agreement that the fu$%^r is in breach of the lease, they should be writing to him.
You could also wait for one of the staff or clients to park there and tell them to get f$%^ed. I doubt that the fu$%er having their staff and clients getting told they are parked contrary to the fu£$ers lease is going to reflect well on the fu^*£r.
creampuff said:
You could also wait for one of the staff or clients to park there and tell them to get f$%^ed. I doubt that the fu$%er having their staff and clients getting told they are parked contrary to the fu£$ers lease is going to reflect well on the fu^*£r.
I've tried that. They just say that the accountant has given them permission to park there, and if I have a problem with that, to take it up with him. And that they will continue parking there with his permission. Judging by some of his clients, I don't think they could care less whether their accountant is breaching his lease.The main problem with approaching him or his staff or clients is catching them in the act. I work 9-5, and generally their cars are either already there when I come out to my car, or arrive after I've gone. They're usually gone by the time I get home. And as I'm frequently busy & pressed at work, cutting into my working day by loitering around waiting to harass them isn't really feasible.
Edited by stroberaver on Monday 23 July 21:34
surveyor said:
Red Devil said:
surveyor said:
You've also got the problem that clamping is rumoured to be outlawed and you are left with recovering from the registered keeper and we all know how well that works.
Regarding clamping, a lot of people are not doing their homework. Look again at Section 54 (3) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. All that is needed is something like this. Note the sting in the tail. As long as it is present it can stay up indefinitely!When the relevant Commencement Order goes through be in no doubt that the RK will be pursuable. Assuming his/her details have not been deliberately falsified of course.
stroberaver said:
I've tried that. They just say that the accountant has given them permission to park there, and if I have a problem with that, to take it up with him. And that they will continue parking there with his permission.
The only permission he could conceivably give is to one other person in his stead to use the single space he is entitled to under the terms of the lease (for example the tenant of his flat). No way can he do so for all his staff and clients at the same time. The letter to his lender sounds an excellent idea. Make sure that the management company really are considering forfeiture though. Never make a threat you can't back up.
Red Devil said:
He can have a many blippers as he wants. They won't release a clamp. Once the Commencement Order is in place all that is needed are the requisite notices. All his staff and clients can then be lawfully immobilised. I doubt they will then continue with the current abuse.
Thanks, I've had a look through Section 54 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/section/54/enacted) but I'm not too good at lawyer-speak. Am I right in thinking that it basically says you're not allowed to clamp/immobilise a car, unless the car is in an area that is physically barriered off from the public? i.e. in this case, a gated car park?(EDIT) Wikipedia says that this entitlement to clamp if barriered was removed at the Report stage at the House of Commons, and cites this link: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/... - not sure how I find the relevant text in that lot!!
(EDIT AGAIN) All that legislation and the exemptions with barriers in place etc. seem to refer to commercially operated car parks and accepting an agreement/charges when driving in, rather than a private residential car park where you're simply not allowed to park, full stop. Is there anyone here who can interpret the legislation as it applies to my situation?
Edited by stroberaver on Monday 23 July 22:30
Edited by stroberaver on Monday 23 July 22:53
Regarding the numbering of spaces - if you do this, be careful not to use a numbering system that matches the numbers of the individual apartments. This gives any opportunistic thieves the heads up to attempt a break in as they know which properties are likely to be unoccupied if the corresponding parking spaces are empty.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff