Licenced Garage

[Pariah81]

Some leaseholders on our estate have a garage that is granted on licence when they purchase their flat. There are a few individual garages and also a communal garage.

The licence states that the only use of the garage must be for the parking of a vehicle and it is required that a vehicle registration number is provided before parking a vehicle.

The freeholder has noticed that in a communal garage some are using their space for storage.

We have now been give the following information by the freeholder.

'If the licence holder does not have a vehicle to park in the garage, then it will notify the landlord/managing agent. The managing agent will then have the opportunity to rent the garage to another leaseholder on the estate, the rental income for which, will be split 50/50 between the landlord and the licence holder. Such rental agreement will be terminable on 1 months’ notice in the event that the licence holder purchases a car and wishes to use the garage. If there is no other leaseholder that wishes to rent the garage, then subject to certain terms (to ensure safety, etc) the licence holder may use the garage for storage, until such time as it is needed by another leaseholder for car parking purposes.

Can the freeholder do this?

I guess he can say its either this or I 'determine' the licence.

[nukecad]

The freeholder has noticed that in a communal garage some are using their space for storage.

Could you clarify that, if it's a comunal garage then how can it be 'their' space?

Conversely, if they are individual garages then how can they be 'comunal'?

What do the leases of those who don't have a 'garage licence' say about this communal parking?

[Pariah81]

Could you clarify that, if it's a comunal garage then how can it be 'their' space?

Conversely, if they are individual garages then how can they be 'comunal'?

What do the leases of those who don't have a 'garage licence' say about this communal parking?

We have around 5 individual garages and another garage with 3 parking spaces (I refer to that as the communal garage). Each parking space in the communal garage is allocated to a specific flat.

Whilst the document tries to convey it is assigned on licence, from the case law I have read, the document, in law, may well be considered a lease.

If a person or business occupies premises, the freehold or superior interest of which is owned by somebody else:

• (a) for a term (that is, for a fixed period or for a period which can be ascertained by reference to a termination notice period); and
• (b) exclusively (that is, without interruption and with the ability to exclude the owner or any other party at any or at certain times)

then, regardless as to how the occupation arrangement is named, documented or otherwise referred to, it will be a lease, as opposed to a mere licence.

[nukecad]

Without knowing what the original flat leases say then it's difficult to be sure.

But going from:

Each parking space in the communal garage is allocated to a specific flat.

It looks to me that the flats may have originally came with a parking space included in the lease, and that these additional 'licences' are simply a way for the landlord to make a bit extra money.
Nothing wrong with that, but without the tenants agreeing to change the lease the 'licence' could only be imposed on the new tenants when a flat is re-let.
Eventually all the flats would change hands and all garages would be covered by the additional 'licence'.

The new proposal to let a demised space to someone else if you are not using it for a car, and split that rent 50/50 with the landlord would be a change to that licence/lease.
So unless the licence has a clause about the landlord being able to vary the conditions the new poposal can't be imposed without the agreement of the individual flat owner concerned.

Basically it's saying - "Don't store stuff in the garage parking spaces they are only for parking - but if you don't have a car to park we can arrange for another tenant to park in your space for a fee, and we can both make a bit of money from that".

It seems sensible, they could have simply just gone by what the licence currently says ie. "no storage, cars only" and so those without a car would have to leave their space empty.

(Note that unless that 'licence' has a clause about no sub-letting then it may be possible to let your empty garage space yourself, and keep all the money, but it would be easier and safer to use their proposal and let them manage it).