Jump to content

Sliliplili

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Sliliplili

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Thank you. We are all freeholders. There are 2separate issues. I concede that legal opinion has said 60/40 that residents cannot park there. But visitors can, and the leases do not put a time limit on the use by visitors. So, the new 4 hour limit on visitors is, i think, not enforcable as it takes away an existing right. However, they will put stickers on visitors staying over 4hours. I know putting stickers on the those who sticker is childish, but why should they do it without any redress? Thanks again
  2. Thank you. This dispute has been ongoing for the 2 years that I have lived here and for at least a year previously. The spaces are almost always empty, and there are very few visitors. The 2/3 residents who have their own space are the ones who object, ( and one of those lives in spain for 6months a year). I think i have a right to park there on a first come first served basis. The right of visitors to park there is not disputed, but is now to be limited arbitrarily to 4 hours, which takes away a 'right' in all the leases. The remainder of the residents are in their 80s, and vote with the most aggressive voice which is the one with his own space. I know how it looks, but i do think we are being bullied. Further, the resident who parks there most often is Chinese, and i think i have detected an element of racism or xenophobia in the history of the dispute.
  3. Update At the residents assn AGM this week it was decided to place 'parking violation ' stickers on the windsreen of residents who stay longer than 30 minutes in the 2 visitor spaces. These stickers are apparently v difficult to remove. I am tempted to retaliate by placing a sticker on the car of the person who suggested/ does this, if it ever happens to me. Is there any legal implication, such as an offence of criminal damage, or making a car undrivable if vision is impaired? The clause in the leases clearly state that visitors have a right use these spaces when available, and no time limit is given. The new reg also limits visitors to 4 hours in any 24. I understood that no reg could take away an existing right in a lease, so surely this cannot be enforced?
  4. I really appreciate you taking the time and effort to reply. This thread has been very helpful.
  5. I understand your point, thank you for advice to be cautious. The immediate issue is whether parking company could legally impose charges, or whether it could be challenged to prevent them being contracted in first place. Thanks very much for responding.
  6. The solicitor on purchase interpreted the clause as meaning both residents and visitors could use these spaces. This went to a QC who ruled a 60% chance court would rule it as visitor only. But if it is not legal for parking company to charge then that is good news. Thanks
  7. They are changing the rules to limit a visitor to 4 hours. Visitors are very rare really, and visitor permits are available for on road parking. Thank you for comments.
  8. All residents jointly share freehold. Interesting you think the charge has to be justified, thanks
  9. A few residents who have their own designated spaces or no car, object to other car owners parking in 2 empty visitor spaces on first come first served basis. Legal opinion ruled that there was a 60% probability that a court would rule that residents leases say that they may not park in these usually empty spaces.They want to bring in a car parking company to put up notices and charge £80 for any resident parking for longer than half an hour in the courtyard. How can the 3/4 car owners who are happy to cooperate and share these spaces, prevent the contracting of the car parking company? There are 14 flats and a majority voted at agm to agree with the parking restrictions. Grateful thanks for any suggestions.
×
×
  • Create New...