Parking spot and leasehold flats

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Parking spot and leasehold flats

    Hi all. I wonder if anyone can help please?

    I currently own the ground floor flat in a block of 3 in a Victorian property which was converted in the late eighties. My mother lived in the flat but passed away last year and the flat is now for sale. There is one parking spot in the front garden where the kerb has been dropped. The problem is that the lady who owns the middle flat thinks that the parking spot is hers and has a lease plan to prove this. However, I have a lease plan which shows the parking spot goes with my ground floor flat. It seems that her lease was granted first in 1988 and the lease to my flat was created later in 1991. I wonder if there is a legal principle that means the first granted lease has priority.

    Also, when there is a car in the drive, the access to all flats is very restricted so that even the bins will not pass. This was not really a problem before for my mum who was virtually housebound but now raises its head with every viewing I get.

    I think the original developer who converted the flats intended to drop the kerb all along the front of the property, knock down the small wall and block pave the front garden and give 1 spot to each flat. However, this was never done. I considered making a planning application to do this now but as the planning regs have now changed (requiring a minimum depth of 5 metres), this is not possible.

    Could anyone suggest a way to resolve this mess as the flat seems virtually unsaleable until it is sorted.
    If it helps, I own 50% of the freehold along with the lady who owns the middle flat and claims the parking is hers. She is a lovely lady and very reasonable but did buy her flat on the basis it had the parking spot and I think she would be reluctant to give it up unless she has to.
    Please let me know if any further information would help with suggestions.

    Many thanks

    Ask her if she will sell you her space?


      Is it mentioned at all in the words of either lease. Just a map without saying what the map indicates ("the red bit is xxxx") can be pretty worthless. I would have thought you were sold a lease to something the then FH did not have a right to sell, so if push came to shove I guess the first would have priority, and your option would be to sue the FH (now you).

      Could buy it. If your flat really is unsaleable, get a lease variation to remove it from your lease. Or ask other lady if she is willing to spin for it and whoever wins will keep the parking, pay for the lease variation, and pay the other £X.


        Thanks for both your replies. I am currently trying to sound her out whether she would be prepared to relinquish the spot whether for money or not. I'm not sure whether there is wording in the lease or just a plan but I can check.
        I wonder if it is a specific legal principle that the first granted lease takes priority? If it is, then the spot is hers and as you say, my option is to sue the freeholder. Although this is now me, it wasn't when the second lease was granted so would there be redress there? If so, who against. I guess the 3 options would be the original freeholder or the solicitor who granted the lease or the solicitor who accepted the initial lease?
        Thanks again


          Common sense would dictate that the earlier lease would take precedence. Could it be the solicitor at the time cut some corners when preparing the second lease? Possibly.

          Irregardless if the entrance to the property is being obstructed by the parking of a lessee's vehicle then I would say that certainly interferes with the quiet enjoyment of the proerty for other lessees and a h&s risk for the freeholder.

          As a practical solution, can the wall just be removed and two spaces formed [clearing the entrance] both accessed via the existing dropped kerb?
          There is always scope for misinterpretation.

          If my posts can be interpreted in two ways, one that makes you feel angry and one that doesn't, I meant the latter.

          Everyday is an opportunity to learn something new.


            As your lease was granted after the lease for the middle flat, my guess is that the parking space belongs to the middle flat and that your lease is defective. The conveyancing solicitor you used when buying your flat would have had no way of knowing that the parking space was on your lease erroneously. I have never heard of a conveyancing solicitor reading all of the leases in a building. That said, I feel that any redress you may have will be with the original freeholder whom commissioned the leases. Of course the original freeholder may have redress against the solicitor he/she used to draw up the leases in the first place.

            The easiest thing to do may be to vary your lease to remove any mention of the parking space altogether. Although this might get you a lower selling price, it would be better than not being able to sell the flat at all because your lease is defective.


            Latest Activity


            • Chimney Removal from the roof
              As a part of roof renovation works we want to remove external part of the chimney (above the roof line). The house is semi detached, the chimney is located in the outer part of the house and is not part of any party wall.
              The condition of the chimney is quite bad and we prefer to remove everything...
              05-07-2019, 09:11 AM
            • Reply to Chimney Removal from the roof
              That's right!
              We are only removing the part above the roof line, and the example recommendation from leaseholder64 might be more applicable when some parts of the chimney would be removed from inside of the house, which is not the case.
              Many thanks you both for a prompt reply!
              05-07-2019, 14:59 PM
            • Reply to Chimney Removal from the roof
              Well reading that document I see no reason to talk to Building Control at all! All that is being proposed is removal of the top of the chimney to below the roof line. As long as suitable ventilation is provided at the new 'top' then just get on with it.

              I say this from having researched...
              05-07-2019, 14:26 PM
            • Reply to Chimney Removal from the roof
              Building Control definitely needs to be notified, see, for example,
              05-07-2019, 11:10 AM
            • Reply to Chimney Removal from the roof
              I would have a word with building control Demolition work tends to be notifiable and the change in weight distribution may affect the structure.

              I'm not sure about planning permission, but I don't recognize it as being a permitted development.

              You may well find that a photograph...
              05-07-2019, 11:02 AM
            • property access issue?
              Hi all
              Couple of questions, Im looking to make a planning application to change a commercial B1 property to residential (property build around 1820)
              The building has had historically (I think an original door) and still physically has in place the doorway but which leads out to a neighbors...
              04-07-2019, 19:09 PM
            • Reply to property access issue?
              First thing you need to find out is whether the property has any right of access over either the driveway or the pub car park. Presumably it has a right of access from somewhere?
              04-07-2019, 19:44 PM
            • listed building consent
              Damp Proof Course what have been your experiences with applying for planning and listed building consent for a modern damp proof course where there is not one already and the groundfloor flat is damp?
              22-06-2019, 16:25 PM
            • Reply to listed building consent
              Yes agree with you leaseholder 64 however the leaseholder was told by his surveyor that a DPC would do the trick so to speak however this advice can not be followed as listed building consent is required which would not be given as a modern DPC for a listed building would be a BIG no no and seen as...
              23-06-2019, 19:58 PM
            • Reply to listed building consent
              Is the lower part of the wall at least 150mm above ground level? If not a DPC is not really an option. (I'm not quite clear about the ground is higher sentence, but it sounds like it means that the damp wall is below ground level.)

              In any case, my feeling would be that, on an old building,...
              23-06-2019, 19:12 PM