FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Argyle on September 22, 2014, 03:07:25 PM
-
According to a number of in -house article's Croydon Council have won an injuction against a leaseholder to gain access to fit a new fire door to the individual flat entrance. Dose any body have any further information about the judgement. From the article it says that it was on the 1st August at Croydon County Court ?
-
Yes, see
http://andyrayblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/09/leaseholder-test-case-could-be-breakthrough-for-fire-safety/
-
Check out http://www.crisis-response.com/forum/index.php?topic=6585.new#new
or http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19935%3Aborough-obtains-injunction-to-assess-property-for-potential-fire-hazards&catid=60&Itemid=28
-
Thanks for the information - I am however seeking a copy of the judgement. I was wanting to see the actual story behind the case and what if any previsos that the court may have placed upon it etc.
-
I've taken a quick look at injunctions and the council only have to make a sworn statement to obtain one should the judge see fit; the real test would be if the tenant appeals but I've not found any clear guidance on the appeals process as yet.
http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal-information/injunctions/injunction-how-do-i-apply.html
http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal-information/injunctions/housing-injunctions.html
-
it seems that once having obtained the injunction this has to be served on the person and then the person can appeal to a higher court. I would guess that part of the actual injunction would detail the appeal process rather like the Enforcement Notices and without that the injunction would not be legal.
-
I suspect there is more to this than a council merely seeking an injunction to access a single private dwelling in order that they might replace a non-compliant front door.
It sounds more likely to me that the Council is seeking to use this injunction as a means of fitting a new door and subsequently be in a position to recover the costs of this work from the resident.
-
Not necessarily, I have come across instances where a person has purchased a flat within a block and has installed a new upvc front door including stained glass effect and has refused to have it replaced with a FD30 door. Even if the door is replaced at no cost the owner objects to having the very expensive door removed.
-
I understand that DCLG is very reluctant for enforcing authorities to use their FSO powers directly against residents of single private dwellings and therefore alternative means of securing compliance with the Order are under consideration.
Anecdotally I?ve heard that LFB is considering serving enforcement notices on those responsible for the entire building in instances where front doors need replacing, even when the residents of single private dwellings within that building are contractually responsible for their own front doors; I wondered if this might be such a case?
-
The thing about bullies is that they are cowards at heart. All a householder has to do is stamp their feet at LFB and they will run a mile rather than serve an enforcement notice on a leaseholder who will not change their FED. However, EHOs sometimes have more balls.
-
Why should the enforcing authority go for the individual leaseholder? Surely it is the duty of the responsible person for the building to ensure the safety of the relevant persons within the building? It is the same no matter what the building is used for.
It comes down to the other argument about what people put into the common areas. whether it is a firm dumping a load of materials on the escape routes or a flat owner filling the common area with floral displays, whose responsibility is it to control this?
The principle must be that a person inside a flat can do what they like until they start to cause a hazard or nuisance to others around them.
-
The thing about bullies is that they are cowards at heart. All a householder has to do is stamp their feet at LFB and they will run a mile rather than serve an enforcement notice on a leaseholder who will not change their FED. However, EHOs sometimes have more balls.
Dotty you will find that its prob the case that the freeholder must demonstrate they have attempted to enforce terms of the lease agreement themselves before the enforcing authority can justify using its big stick and issuing a notice.
-
Did all that clevey. The freeholder even threatened to break in to leaseholders properties to get the work done but was advised he would be committing trespass. So we appealed to the great and wonderful LFB, who agreed informally to take enforcement action against the non compliant leaseholders. Then as soon as leaseholders said boo go away, they decided it was not the will of parliament for them to take enforcement action. Happily, the local authority had the nerve to use the Housing Act.
-
Colin
You appear to have some inside knowledge on this matter - if so can you confirm what has already been said in that obtaining the injuction is not the relevant bit but the decision in the likly appeal to the injuction. I ask as someone working in social housing and we are keenly looking at this injuction. Also would you know if the door is being offered free or is service chargable to the leasholder?
-
In cases like this it is so tempting to tell the landlord to build a 6inch deep porch outside the door put a fire door on it and provide protection that way. Landlord's domain etc.