Thanks for your question. Please kindly RATE my answer when you are satisfied
Are the regulations that are formulated from time to time supported by a majority of residents in your view please?
Yes, with the exception of the one I have quoted
Thanks. Such a provision in leases is very common and the idea behind it is that not all circumstances and eventualities can be anticipated by the person drafting the lease and according such a provision is proposed to allow the landlord or management company to effectively manage the property and grounds rather than being rigidly bound by lease provisions.
Any regulations formulated under the provision must stand up to a "reasonableness and proportionality test"
The tenants can either challenge such conditions which do not satisfy this test by way of a shareholder vote or alternatively any individual tenant can challenge the management company at a leasehold tribunal
An application can be made to an LVT as above using the following form if this becomes necessary:
Sorry for the delay. The courts website seems to be down at the moment and I am having trouble obtaining the link...
ok not a problem
the background is that the property is one of a number in a converted stately home - the freehold company officers are generally retired people who tend to be extremely officious and attempt to throw their weight around
This is the link to the forms (which is not working at present). The one you require is the application for a determination that a breach of covenant has occurred. They should fix the website shortly.
Is there anything above I can clarify for you?
I do not agree with the FOP they have proposed - both in legal terms and because it would represent an extension of their perceived control over the estate
based on the wording, do you think it likely that the court would agree with the regulation regarding patio use?
I cannot see any difficulty with prohibiting acts that create nuisance. In fact there is already statutory legislation that deals with nuisance.
It would depend on practically how that is interpreted and implemented. It is not appropriate or lawful to unreasonably interfere with a leaseholders enjoyment of his own property without reasonable justification which would be founded on interference with others enjoyment. e.g bbqs that create smoke can be deemed inappropriate if in close proximity to other dwellings. Tables and chairs on the other hand would likely be disproportionate if they were banned.
Is there anything above I can clarify for you any further?
No I think I understand, thanks for your help
A pleasure. I hope you are able to reach a sensible resolution with the management company
actually there is one thing
just to clarify - there is no covenant governing use of patios etc in the way referred to, whereas the other regulations are essentially interpretations of existing covenants
can a regulation not specified in covenant/contract be enforceable in such an absence
Yes it can if there is a provision in the lease that the management company can make further regulations providing such further regulations pass the reasonableness test discussed above.
Does the above answer all your questions or is there anything I can clarify or help with any further?
That's it for now - thanks very much
If you have no further questions for now I should be very grateful if you would kindly take a moment to rate my service to you today. Your feedback is important to me. If there is anything else I can help with though please reply back to me though.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).