The Lounge
The place to relax and chat about anything.
22,550 topics in this forum
-
- 94 replies
- 4.7k views
-
- 95 replies
- 3.6k views
-
- 21 replies
- 968 views
-
- 0 replies
- 538 views
-
- 2 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 0 replies
- 307 views
-
- 1 reply
- 570 views
-
- 108 replies
- 8.6k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 0 replies
- 393 views
-
- 1 reply
- 270 views
-
- 5 replies
- 523 views
-
- 0 replies
- 337 views
-
- 4 replies
- 610 views
-
- 1 reply
- 513 views
-
- 0 replies
- 109 views
-
- 2 replies
- 547 views
-
- 21 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 9 replies
- 673 views
-
- 4 replies
- 644 views
-
- 0 replies
- 414 views
-
- 1 reply
- 544 views
-
- 0 replies
- 121 views
-
- 3 replies
- 598 views
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
it would seem very likely that they are trying it on if it their area - ie not a responsibility of the freehold. The freehold would cover the building structure (walls, foundation, roof) - possibly freeholder would have responsibility for the front door - if so, does the freeholder have the windows? Usually grey area in a lease so you could look at past instances - who has paid for window replacement, front door to be painted etc? -
By Dulwichlass · Posted
Thanks for these comments. Very helpful. The porch and hallway shows on their lease plan but we share the freehold together. -
By Cyclemonkey · Posted
Ok. You have bigger problems than this s20 notice. How have you let one freeholder dominate things. You both have the equal right to decide how to manage the communal areas of the property. I would get some legal advice on your duties and rights as a freeholder and then request a meeting to reset the relationship. Also as noted in other posts is the front yard and door actually the responsibility of the freeholder. These are all questions you should ask in your S20 response. -
seems perfectly sensible to restrict cert 18 but would have thought cert 15 are acceptable. we don't know what the complaint was or if the measures taken by the cinema address it or go too far. if there was a scenario when an infant was in a regular screening, then I would completely understand the complaint. if the complaint was from someone who attended a parent screening, then - well, I guess it depends what was on! if the complaint was from someone who has not involvement or experience then the cinema surely wouldn't have taken measures based on it
-