Lease law: Definition of 'one family only' / 'single private dwelling'?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    I have been going over the lease again and it also states that the owner must "use the demised premesis as a private residence and for no other purpose" which presumably prohibits sharing/lodge ring, or taking in of friends or young professionals? Any thoughs on this?

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by derekunderwood01 View Post
      I have been going over the lease again and it also states that the owner must "use the demised premesis as a private residence and for no other purpose" which presumably prohibits sharing/lodge ring, or taking in of friends or young professionals? Any thoughs on this?
      Think you will find that clause restricts business use etc. It is still a private residence.
      The clauses you need to identify are ones that restrict underletting/subletting part of the property(as opposed to the whole) and nuisance, they are the ones that are relevant.

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by derekunderwood01 View Post
        I have been going over the lease again and it also states that the owner must "use the demised premesis as a private residence and for no other purpose" which presumably prohibits sharing/lodge ring, or taking in of friends or young professionals? Any thoughs on this?
        Think you will find that clause restricts business use etc. It is still a private residence.
        The clauses you need to identify are ones that restrict underletting/subletting part of the property(as opposed to the whole) and nuisance, they are the ones that are relevant.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by DNM2012 View Post
          Which is a whole other legal can of worms, the OP hasn't said what the noise nuisance is!
          Indeed, I suspect it is just a case of lot of feet tramping around on no doubt devils floorboards with a lease that requires carpeting. I suspect they have gone looking for a solution and are using the occupancy clause as the stick.

          #29 is a perfect argument as to why the clause restricting use to one family is in the lease.

          If there is basis for the claim then its 2 for 1 at the FTT
          Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

          Comment


            #35
            Exactly my point LHA. I'm hoping the ftt see it that way. Again I would ask:

            - what are the rough initial costs of all this, as far as I can see its only £150 for the application to the ftt and I can fill this out myself?
            - who's responsibility is it to prove the ratioship of the two couples? I.e. that they are not family? Potentially they could claim they are just distant cousins. They have already mentioned that they are all young professionals sharing, is this in itself enough to prove they re not one family?
            - presumably even if they were family it would still (as you say Lha) quality as 'families' occupying the property?

            Comment


              #36
              You can but be warned you have to be able to have a basis for your allegations from evidence of the disturbance and discussion about the occupation prepared in advance. You might for example show that they obtain the lodgers from a web site or local advert.

              In this case it is for them to show that they are a family, familial relationship or not, and to an extent noise issues might indicate that they live separte lives, and are in fact two families.

              it very much depends on the term of the lease as to whether the costs are recoverable, but you will initially have to bear these.

              I suggest before applying that you load the exact lease wording in the the FTT decisions and say BAILLI to look at the various twists and turns, as well as any definition of family therein, so that your argument is well researched. Do bear in mind that under the new rules you cannot rely on the panel accepting information that they stumble on and will have to make a comprehensive argument.
              Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

              Comment


                #37
                Leasehold answers - do you have this LVT case to hand? or can you provide a link to it

                Comment


                  #38
                  Youre right in saying that the noise issue indicates that they live separate lives and are two families - they live completely seperate lives.. in out in out... its rediculous. Lived in bad buildings in london for 10 years and never experienced anything like it...

                  As far as a 'basis for allegations' I have submitted dates and times of nuisances to the managing agent on multiple occasions - is that enough of a 'basis'?

                  As far as I can see getting a tribunal decision via LVT is merely £150, is that correct? Where do the solicitor costs come in?

                  Comment


                    #39
                    LHA either your brain is still addled by lack of caffiene or mine is, and I just had a coffee!

                    Surely only the freeholder can take the leaseholder to court for breach of lease, although the leaseholder pays his costs and provides evidence?

                    Comment


                      #40
                      The leaseholder can request the freeholder (or the managing agent) take the other leaseholder to court - or the leaseholder can take the other leaseholder to court (as far as i know). What happens if the freeholder refuses though, can a leaseholder still take the nusiance leaseholder to the FTT for a (suspected) breach of lease, or do they have to employ their own solicitor?

                      Costs of FTT?

                      Comment


                        #41
                        One other question I had is if the friends have known eachother for years and move in together then share everything, can they be deemed 'one family'? Ive read case where the tribunal had no hesitation in determining an old friend family... I thought it was based around whether they were related or not?

                        Comment


                          #42
                          youve just reminded me why I live in a house not a flat. Does your lease entitle you to have the freeholder commence proceedings against a nother lesser for nuisance?

                          Keep a noise diary, and get your local council involved re noise nuisance, they do have powers to do so

                          Comment


                            #43
                            Originally posted by derekunderwood01 View Post
                            The leaseholder can request the freeholder (or the managing agent) take the other leaseholder to court - or the leaseholder can take the other leaseholder to court (as far as i know). What happens if the freeholder refuses though, can a leaseholder still take the nusiance leaseholder to the FTT for a (suspected) breach of lease, or do they have to employ their own solicitor?

                            Costs of FTT?
                            It depends on what the lease says.

                            If and only if any of the tenant's covenants are expressed to be with the landlord and the other tenants then one of the other tenants can sue in respect of such covenants, but not in respect of any other covenants.

                            If the landlord covenants with the tenant that he will enforce any breach of covenant of another lease on request then he must do subject to such conditions as are set out. If he fails to do so the tenant can sue the landlord to obtain an order requiring him to sue.

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Originally posted by derekunderwood01 View Post
                              One other question I had is if the friends have known eachother for years and move in together then share everything, can they be deemed 'one family'? Ive read case where the tribunal had no hesitation in determining an old friend family... I thought it was based around whether they were related or not?
                              There are no hard and fast rules here. In the context of tenancies where "family" is not defined the question to ask, I think, is whether the occupants if not related are living together as if they were a family. You have to look at the whole picture. A court is going to put as wide an interpretation as it can on what family means because lease covenants are construed against landlords.

                              Suing the leaseholder on a breach of the covenant to use the flat in the occupation of a single family only and on no other grounds is going to be risky. By all means include it if you sue on other grounds such as a covenant not to sublet or not to cause a nuisance, if available. None of these grounds are going to be dealt with by a court speedily.

                              In the first instance a section 146 notice should be served. It may not have any effect but will indicate that the situation is being taken seriously.

                              In addition to any action you take under landlord and tenant law you really ought to be contacting your local environmental health officer. He is not concerned with landlord and tenant law nor whether the occupants are related. His sole concern will be whether there is a nuisance. It will also cost you nothing.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Well actually no its not simply the lease and I am not sure if #43 fully answers that.

                                As posed, I understand your issue is where a freeholder refuses ( in which case #43 explains your remedy) or is unable or not required to do so, and therefore if you pursue an action against the owner as a leaseholder, does the FTT have jurisdiction. The answer to that is no.
                                Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X