How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Stuart J Your Own Question
Stuart J
Stuart J, Solicitor
Category: UK Property Law
Satisfied Customers: 22591
Experience:  PGD Law. 20 years legal profession, 6 as partner in High Street practice
Type Your UK Property Law Question Here...
Stuart J is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

managers of my flat are refusing to allocate parking spaces

This answer was rated:

the managers of my flats are refusing to allocate parking spaces despite the lease requiring them to, and despite another leasee winning an High Court action to get her space allocated successfully! can I get an injunction? I am advised that the lack of an allocated space could reduce my value by 5%

Thank you for the question. It is my pleasure to help you with this today. Please bear with me if I ask for more information.

What exactly does the leas say about allocation of parking?

Why didnt you all take out joint action in high court?

Why are they refusing to do this?

Customer: replied 3 years ago.

the lease does not demise a space but gives the right to occupy the garage parking space provided by the Lessor. The rules and regs then say the vehicle must be parked in the numbered space allocated to them. Not everyone wants allocated spaces and some prefer a free for all so they can park in the most convenient space. some owners offered to join the original injuction but because of the risk of costs only one person took action. costs have been awarded against the freeholders £69K but these have been taken out of our sinking fund!


actually have two matters to deal with them. I think you have the reach of
directors duties for carrying on with this litigation and then taking the costs
out of the sinking fund. It means that all the other leaseholders are paying
for this cost. That is a very specialist area of law.

are then faced with bringing the same action against the landlords as the
previous tenant which the landlord is definitely hundred breach of duty. If
they defend based upon the previous failed litigation.

this stage in time, I think a strongly worded solicitors letter and possibly
the issue of proceedings might push this along to a conclusion although you
will always faced with the risk that a court may make a different decision. I
cannot see how they could come to a different decision, but there is a risk for
whatever reason.

cannot beat the landlord with a stick until he rolls over and if he will not
see sense, then your only remedy is court.

To be
honest, I cannot see why he bothered defending the action.

Customer: replied 3 years ago.

in your 2nd para you state hundred breach of duty - what does this mean?

what costs would be involved

Sorry, my typo.


Under a breach of duty.


Probably better put "Under a duty which they have breached"


I think they pursued defending this litigation pointlessly on the basis that they would simply take the costs from the sinking fund. That isn't what the fund is for

Customer: replied 3 years ago.

how much is it likely to cost me to pursue these two actions?


are certainly not do it yourself jobs, although there is no legal reason why
you cannot conduct such litigation yourself.

view of the previous successful case, you may be able to get a solicitor to do
this on a no win no fee basis and it is certainly worthwhile ringing around a
few solicitors to see if you can find one that will take it on. You may have to
do make quite a few telephone calls.

is never cheap and you can see that the landlords had to pay £69,000 in legal
costs when they lost.

If you
lost, you could face the same kind of cost.

of everything that I have said above, you might want to speak to whoever
brought the previous case because it would seem logical that the solicitors
that dealt with the previous one could do this on the same basis.

would also be worthwhile speaking to that leaseholder with regard to the fact
that the costs came from the sinking fund because in effect, it means that
leaseholder paid for the cost of his/her own successful litigation!

might be interested in pursuing the sinking fund element.

Stuart J and other UK Property Law Specialists are ready to help you

Related UK Property Law Questions