Electrics in detached garage

[Cate007]

Thank you, the only issue is those items are not usually under someone else’s property. There are specialist coach house insurers. I have contacted one who said they wouldn’t insure and would expect lease compliance. I have already explored. If it was my
Own garage with a freezer in - that would be accepted.

 

[JohnW2]

Thank you, the only issue is those items are not usually under someone else’s property.

I agree that garages aren't., However, there must be millions of people living in flats etc. below which there are other dwellings 'below them', those dwellings containing any number of domestic appliances and with people coming and going all the time, mustn't there?

There are specialist coach house insurers. I have contacted one who said they wouldn’t insure and would expect lease compliance. I have already explored. If it was my Own garage with a freezer in - that would be accepted.

I guess I'm missing something - what is so special, insurance-wise, about a coach house?

As for insurer's 'expecting lease compliance', since you are the freeholder,aren't you in a position to vary the Lease to 'legitimise' whatever is going on in the garage? ... or is it perhaps primarily you who has concerns about there being electricity in the garage?

... and what are you going to do if the user of the garage gets an EV?

 

[Cate007]

The garage user did enquire about an EV but they couldn’t get enough power/long enough lead from their house to the outside of their garage. I’m no expert but that’s what they fed back so as it stands they can have an EV charging point. So if they had one it would need to be charged at another charging point.

The difference with conventional flats where there are flats on top of flats is everyone has house insurance. Also the insurer is insuring for a habitable space. The garage lease means it can only be used to store a car and not habitable space. It sounds stupid but that is how it is. The leases are designed to protect the flat above.

I won’t evict them from their garage despite the solicitor stating it’s a material breach. Including flammable items stored which is not permitted neither.

Ultimately they’ve brought a house with the garage with the clauses. They have a loft. They can extend an extension cable
From their house to drive as they have a gate at the end. They will have a workaround and If they’re reasonable
I will offer a contribution towards a replacement garage door. It’s one of those if everyone is reasonable
thanks for all your advice

 

[Old Salt]

But surely if its used as a garage to house a car that would have flammables, petrol, oil, oil cans, cleaning fluids. There are absolutely loads of flammables in my garage.

 

[EFLImpudence]

What do the insurance company expect?

 

[JohnW2]

The difference with conventional flats where there are flats on top of flats is everyone has house insurance.

True, but don't those who have garages detached from their houses usually have insurance which covers the garage? Are you saying that this garage is not insured?

Also the insurer is insuring for a habitable space. The garage lease means it can only be used to store a car and not habitable space. It sounds stupid but that is how it is. The leases are designed to protect the flat above.

I think I'm getting a bit lost

As I implied, I'm coming to wonder whether it is perhaps you who has all the concerns. As I also implied, I would be surprised if you, as the freeholder, could not find some mechanism whereby, despite the Lease, you gave permission for the garage to have electricity, but you don't seem to want to do that. Plenty of people have garages detached from their homes, have electricity and electrical appliances in those garages (not to mention, increasingly, EV charging facilities) and manage to insure them (without them being 'habitable'), You seem to be 'blaming' the Lease,but presumably you must have approved of what it say - indeed, to at least some extent quite probably dictated what y ou wanted it to say?

 

[blup]

Sell, before it turns into a neighbour dispute which you have to disclose or which blights a sale.

 

[ebee]

Are you concerned that, for example, in the event of a fire/flood/earthquake etc etc on your property including "their garage" and the are not present (holiday abroad for example) that you will not have a readily available means of isolating electrics to the garage to reduce potential risks to persons/property/livestock?

 

[blup]

They are concerned about noise and disturbance, the electrics bit is a potential pathway to taking legal action.

 

[ebee]

They are concerned about noise and disturbance, the electrics bit is a potential pathway to taking legal action.

Yes I know, I was putting the suggestion of an easy way to obtain the desired the result via a "less confrontational" route.

 

[blup]

Yes I know, I was putting the suggestion of an easy way to obtain the desired the result via a "less confrontational" route.

The OP raised the issue initially as electric cabling, then storage of flammable liquids etc , with noise and disturbance emerging as a concern. The leaseholders are entitled to use the garage for a range of purposes that are related to its use as a domestic garage. It doesn't take much imagination that even more intrusive uses could emerge. With the best will in the world it's not going to be resolved by having access to an isolation switch. Hence my suggestion that they move out or sell because it may get worse or become unbearable.

 

[JohnW2]

Sell, before it turns into a neighbour dispute which you have to disclose or which blights a sale.

As far as I can make out, it is solely the OP (the freeholder) who is doing any 'disputing' so could he not avoid the situation escalating into something more problematical simply by stopping doing that 'disputing'.

As others have recently said, the goalposts keep moving and I, for one, am far from clear as to who is concerned about what, and why!

 

[blup]

As far as I can make out, it is solely the OP (the freeholder) who is doing any 'disputing' so could he not avoid the situation escalating into something more problematical simply by stopping doing that 'disputing'.

As others have recently said, the goalposts keep moving and I, for one, am far from clear as to who is concerned about what, and why!

Fair enough but can one person create an argument

 

[securespark]

Yes

 

[blup]

I see what you did there