Jump to content


Housing Freeholder making threats


00765
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5637 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Nottinh Hill Housing (NHH)have given me a Notice of Intended legal action, telling me that i must carpet my flat because I am allegedly disturbing the people beneath. But the flat has been empty for some 2-3 months + in the summer, NHH told me that i had to lay carpet because they were doing an audit not that i was causing a disturbance

 

Can I challenge NHH?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to read your tenancy agreement, was the flat part furnished which included the carpets. If so its possible you have to have carpets. You need to ask them to make it clear in writing wether the complaint is actually lack of Carpets or a noise nuisance.

Have they been in touch with you before about this, it seems very heavy handed to give you notice of intended legal action without notifying you of a problem beforehand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I own the flat & it is my flat which has been empty for a few months.

 

No, the flat has never had carpet.

 

Unfortuantely I'm not sure where i have placed my leaseholder bundle.

 

Yes Notting Hill did write to me in the summer, when i was abroad for two months, stating that at the time, they were doing an audit and that they were instructing all flat owners in the building, to carpet their flat. Then they changed the reason for the need to carpet my flat, to noise nuisance coming from my flat, which as i say, was empty.

 

I have now composed a letter which i think I might send to NHH asking for an explanation as to how there could have been a plausible complaint about noise eminating from my flat, if it has been empty for the last three months.

 

I only have til Friday 18th Dec 06, to carpet the flat according to NHH's Notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today faxed a letter to NHH demanding for details of the disturbance complaint supposedly lodged and for clarification as to whethet or not I still have to carpet the flat whilst I am disputing the disturbance claim.

 

I await a reply

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
I have today faxed a letter to NHH demanding for details of the disturbance complaint supposedly lodged and for clarification as to whethet or not I still have to carpet the flat whilst I am disputing the disturbance claim.

 

I await a reply

 

Baxter vs Camden Borough Council (1998) COA. The COA judges decided that airborne noise is not a nuscience.Read the judgement below:

 

 

Baxter v London Borough Of Camden [1998] EWCA Civ 1703 (5 November 1998)

 

Best I can do for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have this afternoon sent another letter to NHH, asking them to at least respond to (although not exclusively) the issue i have previously raised, concerning their instruction that i carpet the flat by 18/12/06 as per their Notice of Intended Legal action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
I have this afternoon sent another letter to NHH, asking them to at least respond to (although not exclusively) the issue i have previously raised, concerning their instruction that i carpet the flat by 18/12/06 as per their Notice of Intended Legal action.

 

This is NHT acting like idiots.If you read the case law airborne noise is not a nucience and they cannot tell you what to do in your own property.I suggest you push them to take legal action they won't go through with it knowing that it would get struck out at the first hurdle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Thanks The Terminator.

 

I'm going to follow your advice & push then.

 

I suggest you quote the case law in all corresspondence with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally received a response from NHH today which is as follows;

 

NOTICE OF INTENDED LEGAL ACTION-

 

" I am prepared to state as follows:-

Item 4.2.3 (pg 10) of your lease says " not to commit on the premises or on any part of the common Parts or in the vicinity or neighbourhood of the Premises any acts which cause a nuisance or disturbance to any person..."

 

Following a complaint rceived from another resident it was determined that the current floor coverings are unsuitable which is a breach of item 4.19 (pg 10) of your lease "To provide carpets or such suitable floor covering to the floors of the Premises"

 

Item 6.1 (pg 11) " That the Leaseholder paying the rents hereby reserved and performing and observing the covenants herin contained may peaceable enjoy the Premises during the Term without any lawful interruptiuon by the Landlord or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it"

 

This requires that the freeholder can take action against the leasee should it be reported to them that the leasee is in breach of their lease.

 

This is a legal obligation on the part of NHHO and should not be taken as discriminatory action against any one leaseholder.

 

I hope you understand our position but we are legally obliged to ensure the lease is kept to. You may however prevent this by rectifying the breach.

 

This extension is a good will geature and sent without prejudice or liability.

 

Please ensure that all rooms except the bathroom & kitchen are carpeted by Sunday 14th January 2007. This will be followed by an inspection on Monday 15th January 2007.

 

If you fail to remedy this fault by the deadline specified abovre and make default in the performance of the covenants, Notting Hill housoing Group will have no other alternative but to serve notice to force entry to the above premises, repair the defect and relay all cost to you.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

My original letter to NHHO was as follows;

 

I write in response to your recent Notice of Intended Legal Action, which has been passed to me.

I am astounded and deeply disturbed by the allegation which has apparently been lodged in regard to an alleged disturbance, emanating from xxxxxxx.

I wish to convey my concerns as follows;

1. I was categorically told in August 2006, by a Notting Hill leasehold representative, that carpet needed to be laid at xxxxx, due to an audit and a crack down on leases, which was apparently being conducted by Notting Hill Housing (NHH).

I was specifically informed, that all xxxxxxx leaseholders, had been instructed to carpet their flat. My concern here is and was, as indicated to the Leasehold Officer that, I was and am aware of at least three xxxxxxx leaseholders, who have not to date, been instructed to carpet their flat. Such a glaring lack of consistency, demonstrates a failure to treat all leaseholders in a ‘like’ manner, which is indicative of unfair treatment at the very least.

  • Having initially been told in August that the purpose of the demand that carpet be laid in the flat was for an audit and crack down on leases, I have now received a letter, which essentially alters the reason for the demand from an audit, to a disturbances allegedly emanating from xxx. I find this change in reasoning particularly disturbing, because instead of stating from the start that an allegation had been made against the occupant’s of xxxx, NHH appear to have opted to camouflage the allegation by suggesting, that the carpet laying was required for an audit.

The change in reasoning seems to be based on convenience for Notting Hill Housing, rather than the culmination of a search for the truth or the result of a fair and balanced investigation of the allegation, which would presumably have afforded me the opportunity to defend the allegation.

The periodic allegations, bullying and harassment of the current occupants of xxxx and myself, by NHH officials and whomsoever is or are making the complaints to NHH, has now most appallingly, resulted in the xxxxx occupants (who have been abroad dealing with the sudden death of their father), being forced and compelled to permanently vacate the flat. The occupants were a quiet family, who spent more time abroad than in the UK.

Both the xxxx occupants and I staunchly believe, that we have been discriminated against and treated extremely unfairly. We are of the view that we have been bullied, harassed and that I have been inexcusably threatened with a Notice of Intending Legal action, if I do not carpet my flat.

I request that my concerns as stated above, be seriously and fairly addressed, as a matter of urgency.

I would like to know when the alleged disturbance is supposed to have occurred and indeed I kindly ask to be supplied with full details of when the complaint was lodged and by whom.

I would like to know, when I was asked for my comments on the alleged disturbance.

Finally, I demand for a full and fair investigation of this matter, given the xxx occupants’ and my assertion, that no disturbance can possibly have been caused, given that the flat has been unoccupied for a period of time.

I also seek clarification, as to whether or not carpet is still required to be laid, given that I am contesting the entire process leading up to the notice and the fact that the flat will be fully vacant by 25th December 2006.

If this matter is not fairly & justly resolved, I will be compelled to refer the matter to a statutory body or organization, which monitors Housing Associations.

I await your imminent response.

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

NHHO do not seem to have addressed any of my concerns or answered any of my queries. They've just fobbed me off.

 

They don't even seem to be threatening to go to court but instead they are threatening to break into my flat effect their own repairs & then charge me.

 

The Terminator, do you think that the case you previously referred to, is still relevant to my situation? Is there any other case law i can quote?

 

Can NHHO just determine that the flooring is unsuitable, without having actually viewed it & can they just break into my flat, using my Lease for cover?

 

Is NHHO obliged to furnish me with a copy of my lease, cos i can't find it & clearly, it is imperative that i have sight of it, given that my Lease is what NHH seem to be relying on for their intended break in.

 

Any other suggestions from anyone will be gratefully received.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to reply to NHH's letter basically telling them that they're chatting crap & if they break into my flat i will take them to court.

 

Could someone please direct me to statute or case law that i can quote to NHH to back me up & make me sound like i'm serious & know what I'm talking about.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi..if its a term of your lease that a suitable floor covering is laid within the building i feel that you need to comply with that situation...now what exactly is classed as a suitable floor covering is in my mind very wide ranging..a wooden floor is a suitable floor covering in my books, which would not in any way absolve the noise polution..it seems to me that they have had a few problems with some residents and are having a crackdown and unfortunately its being applied across the board...and it looks like youve drawn the short straw....the noise polution law is immaterial in this instance, they are exercising their rights to order you to carpet or whatever because its clearly a term in the lease agreement...not nice i know but well within the terms of a lease.

i pretty much dont think that it needs the levels of enforcement that are being administered here and that does give rise to doubt, break in and do what? carpet the floor?

there are rights of entry under certain circumstances, i would check your lease thoroughly because what they are saying does sound plausable, even if rather offensive, and you dont want to end up with a carpet bill and a locksmiths bill!!

plus if it comes to the point where they do carry out the job without your permission, you could end up with an overly expensive carpet in a rubbish colour, costing loads more than you could have had it done for..be careful on this one!!!

good luck with it...007

  • Haha 1

"ALWAYS QUOTE ME AS BEING MISQUOTED" :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks jamesbond,

 

your comments sound very much on the money. I did put underlay before the wooden flooring. Is that not suitable flooring? I really do not have money to carpet the rooms.

 

Also NHH have not asked anyone else to carpet their flats in the complex & the person downstairs, has spent the last 8 yrs constantly complaining even though my flat is predominantly empty. I complained about the person downstairs being unreasonable in thier expectation of noise levels plus the fact that my flat is mainly empty.

 

How would NHH know if the current flooring is suitable if they have not bothered to look. So they're jumping to conclusions which seems to me to be unfair.

 

Thanks again jamesbond

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
I finally received a response from NHH today which is as follows;

 

NOTICE OF INTENDED LEGAL ACTION-

 

" I am prepared to state as follows:-

Item 4.2.3 (pg 10) of your lease says " not to commit on the premises or on any part of the common Parts or in the vicinity or neighbourhood of the Premises any acts which cause a nuisance or disturbance to any person..."

 

Following a complaint rceived from another resident it was determined that the current floor coverings are unsuitable which is a breach of item 4.19 (pg 10) of your lease "To provide carpets or such suitable floor covering to the floors of the Premises"

 

Item 6.1 (pg 11) " That the Leaseholder paying the rents hereby reserved and performing and observing the covenants herin contained may peaceable enjoy the Premises during the Term without any lawful interruptiuon by the Landlord or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it"

 

This requires that the freeholder can take action against the leasee should it be reported to them that the leasee is in breach of their lease.

 

This is a legal obligation on the part of NHHO and should not be taken as discriminatory action against any one leaseholder.

 

I hope you understand our position but we are legally obliged to ensure the lease is kept to. You may however prevent this by rectifying the breach.

 

This extension is a good will geature and sent without prejudice or liability.

 

Please ensure that all rooms except the bathroom & kitchen are carpeted by Sunday 14th January 2007. This will be followed by an inspection on Monday 15th January 2007.

 

If you fail to remedy this fault by the deadline specified abovre and make default in the performance of the covenants, Notting Hill housoing Group will have no other alternative but to serve notice to force entry to the above premises, repair the defect and relay all cost to you.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

My original letter to NHHO was as follows;

 

 

I write in response to your recent Notice of Intended Legal Action, which has been passed to me.

 

I am astounded and deeply disturbed by the allegation which has apparently been lodged in regard to an alleged disturbance, emanating from xxxxxxx.

 

I wish to convey my concerns as follows;

 

1. I was categorically told in August 2006, by a Notting Hill leasehold representative, that carpet needed to be laid at xxxxx, due to an audit and a crack down on leases, which was apparently being conducted by Notting Hill Housing (NHH).

 

I was specifically informed, that all xxxxxxx leaseholders, had been instructed to carpet their flat. My concern here is and was, as indicated to the Leasehold Officer that, I was and am aware of at least three xxxxxxx leaseholders, who have not to date, been instructed to carpet their flat. Such a glaring lack of consistency, demonstrates a failure to treat all leaseholders in a ‘like’ manner, which is indicative of unfair treatment at the very least.

 

  • Having initially been told in August that the purpose of the demand that carpet be laid in the flat was for an audit and crack down on leases, I have now received a letter, which essentially alters the reason for the demand from an audit, to a disturbances allegedly emanating from xxx. I find this change in reasoning particularly disturbing, because instead of stating from the start that an allegation had been made against the occupant’s of xxxx, NHH appear to have opted to camouflage the allegation by suggesting, that the carpet laying was required for an audit.

The change in reasoning seems to be based on convenience for Notting Hill Housing, rather than the culmination of a search for the truth or the result of a fair and balanced investigation of the allegation, which would presumably have afforded me the opportunity to defend the allegation.

 

The periodic allegations, bullying and harassment of the current occupants of xxxx and myself, by NHH officials and whomsoever is or are making the complaints to NHH, has now most appallingly, resulted in the xxxxx occupants (who have been abroad dealing with the sudden death of their father), being forced and compelled to permanently vacate the flat. The occupants were a quiet family, who spent more time abroad than in the UK.

 

Both the xxxx occupants and I staunchly believe, that we have been discriminated against and treated extremely unfairly. We are of the view that we have been bullied, harassed and that I have been inexcusably threatened with a Notice of Intending Legal action, if I do not carpet my flat.

 

I request that my concerns as stated above, be seriously and fairly addressed, as a matter of urgency.

 

I would like to know when the alleged disturbance is supposed to have occurred and indeed I kindly ask to be supplied with full details of when the complaint was lodged and by whom.

 

I would like to know, when I was asked for my comments on the alleged disturbance.

 

Finally, I demand for a full and fair investigation of this matter, given the xxx occupants’ and my assertion, that no disturbance can possibly have been caused, given that the flat has been unoccupied for a period of time.

 

 

I also seek clarification, as to whether or not carpet is still required to be laid, given that I am contesting the entire process leading up to the notice and the fact that the flat will be fully vacant by 25th December 2006.

 

If this matter is not fairly & justly resolved, I will be compelled to refer the matter to a statutory body or organization, which monitors Housing Associations.

 

I await your imminent response.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

NHHO do not seem to have addressed any of my concerns or answered any of my queries. They've just fobbed me off.

 

They don't even seem to be threatening to go to court but instead they are threatening to break into my flat effect their own repairs & then charge me.

 

The Terminator, do you think that the case you previously referred to, is still relevant to my situation? Is there any other case law i can quote?

 

Can NHHO just determine that the flooring is unsuitable, without having actually viewed it & can they just break into my flat, using my Lease for cover?

 

Is NHHO obliged to furnish me with a copy of my lease, cos i can't find it & clearly, it is imperative that i have sight of it, given that my Lease is what NHH seem to be relying on for their intended break in.

 

Any other suggestions from anyone will be gratefully received.

 

Thanks

 

The case law is still relevant and I know that it hasn't been superseeded(I do this everyday of the week).No one can determine what flooring you put down and in my opinion NHHO are acting in a very unprofessional way.In your case the Human Rights Act may be applicable I will pull it up and post the parts that are relevant to your case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for confirming what i thought, The Terminator.

 

So do you think i should basically refuse to carpet the floor, quote the case law & refer them back to my letter which they appear not to have dealt with in any serious manner?

 

If they follow through with their threat & break into my flat can i claim anything?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Thanks for confirming what i thought, The Terminator.

 

So do you think i should basically refuse to carpet the floor, quote the case law & refer them back to my letter which they appear not to have dealt with in any serious manner?

 

If they follow through with their threat & break into my flat can i claim anything?

 

They have no right whatsoever to break into your property unless it is an extreme emergency and thats the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as the freeholder the company has certain obligations to the other lease holders to ensure that they are able to live and enjoy their building uninterupted. now i am in agreement with you that wooden flooring with underlay is a suitable covering.

on the down side wooden floors magnify the movement of any one within that building and if you are living underneath it is noticable.

personnally i feel that this should be considered when purchasing a dwelling with someone living above it, as it is without doubt noise is going to occur no matter what floorcovering is used unless a fairy is living there at the time...

they have no obligation to inform you who made the complaint or why, this is a matter of client confidentiality and if you had complained about another leasee then that confidentiallity would apply equally on your behalf.

regarding them accessing the premises you need to study the terms of your lease closely, you must remember the freeholder has informed you in writing that you are in breach of your lease and the reason why. again the terms of the lease are dictated by the freeholder and each one is usually different, and the rights you have are dictated by that lease.

if the lease states that they have reasonable rights of entry in the event of non conformation , and they have served you with the correct paperwork including advance notice to carry out any required repair or undertake work to conform to your lease, and you do not comply i suggest they have redress in that avenue, again study the lease.

if that is not included in the lease they may have to apply to the courts for a warrant of entry to undertake the work required to conform to the lease, which again they are within their rights to do.

this dispute sounds a lot like it is getting out of hand, and to be honest you could end up with far more costs than a carpet if you make the wrong judgement.

if it is not disturbing the resident underneath you then i think that you are having a bit of malice thrown against you which is a bit out of order.

the fact you have agreements in your lease about flooring is undeniable.

the type of flooring is open to dispute?

could you not stick down some cheap jumbo cord carpet, or some large secondhand rugs as you are not living there? this would comply and leave them no course for action?

i say it again you need to look at the lease you have signed carefully, and if you feel it is worth arguing your point then go for it but do be aware it could turn round and bite you...be very careful and i do hope you get it sorted and have a good christmas..

007

"ALWAYS QUOTE ME AS BEING MISQUOTED" :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks The Terminator & Jamebond. Your advice has been invaluable. I'm going to follow both of your points.

 

I'll keep you'll posted.

 

May I wish all who have to date posted on this thread & all at the CAG, a very peaceful XMAS & a most prosperous New Year

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

It's been a while. Happy New year to all.

 

jamesbond, do you have the section of the Human rights act which you think may be relevant to my situation?

 

I have had another letter from NHHO basically standing their ground but saying that their prepared to give me til next Monday to carpet my floors.

 

I still feel that they are treating me differently from all the other leaseholders in the building & that instead of asking for my comments on the complaint of noise nusiance, they simply took the word of the complainant as gospel. Surely there is some law which prevents a housing association from behaving in such an unfair manner.

 

I will use the case law you mentioned but would also like to mention the Human Rights act if possible or & any other pertinant case law or statute.

 

I need to get a reply to them by this thursday.

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry jamesbond & The Terminator, but i think it was actually The Terminator who mentioned the Human Rights Act. It's 2:50am & i guess I'm half asleep.

 

The Terminator, do you by any chance have access to the section of the human Rights act, which you mentioned in an earlier post? I'd be grateful to have sight of it. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've faxed another letter to NHHO in response to their threat to break into the flat tomorrow.

 

Here's the letter

 

I write further to your recent correspondence.

I must express immense disappointment that you have failed to address directly, my query regarding whether NHHO had conferred with me in regard to the alleged complaint of nuisance or indeed any of the other queries I raised in my previous letter.

May I draw your attention to the case of BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998. In this case it was held that ‘the ordinary use of premises for the purpose for which they had been constructed has never been held to be a nuisance’. At no time, has anyone in my flat, utilised the premises for any purpose other than that of residential residence. Therefore there has not been a breach of my lease.

As stated in BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998, the essence of the tort of nuisance, is the undue interference with the use or enjoyment of land. However, surely there must be some type of balance between the rights of the complainant not to be interfered with and my right to do what I wish in my flat.

Has NHHO investigated if the alleged level of noise being transmitted to the complainant’s flat, is beyond the ordinary use of my flat and whether the complainant is or has been, unduly sensitive to noise?

In BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998, the judge noted that ‘occupiers of.., high density housing must be expected to tolerate higher levels of noise, from their neighbours, than others in more substantial and spacious premises. My point is, that in this case, as I have stated before, my flat is empty for extended periods of time, so there is no noise to even tolerate. It must have been contemplated by any person residing below my flat, that persons in my flat or any flat above the ground floor , will walk around wearing ordinary footwear; that children may be in the flat who would make the ordinary noises children make and that I would invite others to my flat and that I would converse with them whilst in the flat. Therefore ordinary noise would be made.

It was in fact NHHO who built or commissioned the construction of xxxxxx. It would have been expected that NHHO would have ensured that the flooring was constructed to a standard accounting for the ordinary noise that would be inevitable, from any floor above the ground floor.

According to your quote my lease states that, ‘carpets OR such suitable floor covering to the floors of the premises’, should be provided. Well I have laid with underlay, laminated flooring which a NHHO official some years ago, inspected and stated that the flooring was fit for purpose.

As such I maintain that, there has been no unreasonable or undue noise transmitted from my flat and hence no breach of Lease. Therefore, I should not be forced to carpet my flat, if I do not want carpet in my own property, simply because of a complaint which is unfounded and a complaint which NHHO has to date, failed to discuss with me or fully and fairly investigate.

NHHO has contravened Article 14 of the Human Rights Act 1998, as it relates to the prohibition of discrimination, in its failure to treat me in a like manner to every other flat owner at xxxxxx and its failure to seek my comments on the alleged complaint.

If any NHHO official or their agent, enters my flat without my express authorization at any time, they will be in contravention of the Human Rights Act Article 8 and I will be left with no option but to seek damages.

I am prepared to speak to a NHHO official about the alleged complaint. However I am not prepared to be bullied and hounded into carrying out alterations to my property just because NHHO have chosen to believe the word of an alleged complainant, without fully investigating the allegation.

Please note as stated in my previous letter, that the flat is currently sporadically occupied. As such NHHO’s reason for Notice of Intended Legal action and its unfair and unbalanced pursuit of this matter, contravenes Article 17 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and conflicts and is also in breach of common law as per BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998

I do not wish to enter into any protracted legal matter with NHHO, I simply expect a large Housing Association such as NHHO, to have handled this matter in a more balanced, fair and none threatening manner. I repeat that I am prepared to discuss the matter; I am even prepared to have an acoustics expect attend my flat and determine the level of ordinary noise emanating from my flat.

If however NHHO insist on pursuing their current course of action and enter my flat either tomorrow or at any time, without my express authorization, I will pursue NHHO for remedies, to the fullest extent of the law.

I look forward to hearing from you imminently.

Yours sincerely,

XXXXXXX

Cc NHHT Complaints Department

Well now I wait in the desparate hope that NHHO do not break into my flat tomorrow as they have threatened to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
I've faxed another letter to NHHO in response to their threat to break into the flat tomorrow.

 

Here's the letter

 

I write further to your recent correspondence.

 

I must express immense disappointment that you have failed to address directly, my query regarding whether NHHO had conferred with me in regard to the alleged complaint of nuisance or indeed any of the other queries I raised in my previous letter.

 

 

May I draw your attention to the case of BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998. In this case it was held that ‘the ordinary use of premises for the purpose for which they had been constructed has never been held to be a nuisance’. At no time, has anyone in my flat, utilised the premises for any purpose other than that of residential residence. Therefore there has not been a breach of my lease.

 

 

As stated in BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998, the essence of the tort of nuisance, is the undue interference with the use or enjoyment of land. However, surely there must be some type of balance between the rights of the complainant not to be interfered with and my right to do what I wish in my flat.

 

Has NHHO investigated if the alleged level of noise being transmitted to the complainant’s flat, is beyond the ordinary use of my flat and whether the complainant is or has been, unduly sensitive to noise?

 

In BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998, the judge noted that ‘occupiers of.., high density housing must be expected to tolerate higher levels of noise, from their neighbours, than others in more substantial and spacious premises. My point is, that in this case, as I have stated before, my flat is empty for extended periods of time, so there is no noise to even tolerate. It must have been contemplated by any person residing below my flat, that persons in my flat or any flat above the ground floor , will walk around wearing ordinary footwear; that children may be in the flat who would make the ordinary noises children make and that I would invite others to my flat and that I would converse with them whilst in the flat. Therefore ordinary noise would be made.

 

It was in fact NHHO who built or commissioned the construction of xxxxxx. It would have been expected that NHHO would have ensured that the flooring was constructed to a standard accounting for the ordinary noise that would be inevitable, from any floor above the ground floor.

 

According to your quote my lease states that, ‘carpets OR such suitable floor covering to the floors of the premises’, should be provided. Well I have laid with underlay, laminated flooring which a NHHO official some years ago, inspected and stated that the flooring was fit for purpose.

 

As such I maintain that, there has been no unreasonable or undue noise transmitted from my flat and hence no breach of Lease. Therefore, I should not be forced to carpet my flat, if I do not want carpet in my own property, simply because of a complaint which is unfounded and a complaint which NHHO has to date, failed to discuss with me or fully and fairly investigate.

 

NHHO has contravened Article 14 of the Human Rights Act 1998, as it relates to the prohibition of discrimination, in its failure to treat me in a like manner to every other flat owner at xxxxxx and its failure to seek my comments on the alleged complaint.

 

If any NHHO official or their agent, enters my flat without my express authorization at any time, they will be in contravention of the Human Rights Act Article 8 and I will be left with no option but to seek damages.

 

I am prepared to speak to a NHHO official about the alleged complaint. However I am not prepared to be bullied and hounded into carrying out alterations to my property just because NHHO have chosen to believe the word of an alleged complainant, without fully investigating the allegation.

 

Please note as stated in my previous letter, that the flat is currently sporadically occupied. As such NHHO’s reason for Notice of Intended Legal action and its unfair and unbalanced pursuit of this matter, contravenes Article 17 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and conflicts and is also in breach of common law as per BAXTER v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN 1998

 

I do not wish to enter into any protracted legal matter with NHHO, I simply expect a large Housing Association such as NHHO, to have handled this matter in a more balanced, fair and none threatening manner. I repeat that I am prepared to discuss the matter; I am even prepared to have an acoustics expect attend my flat and determine the level of ordinary noise emanating from my flat.

 

If however NHHO insist on pursuing their current course of action and enter my flat either tomorrow or at any time, without my express authorization, I will pursue NHHO for remedies, to the fullest extent of the law.

 

I look forward to hearing from you imminently.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

XXXXXXX

 

 

Cc NHHT Complaints Department

 

Well now I wait in the desparate hope that NHHO do not break into my flat tomorrow as they have threatened to do.

 

If they do break into your flat tomorrow please pm me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...