NTC consider allotment rent increase enforcement Options

[Simon Kirby]

So you agree with what I said. You'd have paid your renewal had you known about it in advance.

Just as a point of interest: periodic tenancies don't renew, they just carry on until they come to an end. It's an important distinction because the terms from one period to another are exactly the same, unlike say an insurance policy where you take out a year's policy and then renew it with another one. The new insurance policy has nothing to do with the previous one and it's terms and conditions are negaotiated when you renew it. With the periodic tenancy the new period is just another period of exactly the same tenancy with exactly the same terms and conditions - unless the agreement has a clause to allow something to change.

But to answer you question: How can I say? I'm just insisting on my right to make that decision.

You can't have a free market with allotments unless someone is going to give up some land.

Quite. And S.5 UTCCR says that the fairness of the term is assessed by taking into account the nature of the thing.

[dannyboy]

Why do I get the feeling we'll be seeing this case eventually end in in the European Court of Human Rights?

[user23]

Perhaps you could put the gas to good use by sticking your head in the oven....

I doubt that you have a predetermined cost set in your gas contract. I also suspect that if your gas price went up by 50% that OFGEM would get involved and you would have a perfectly good claim. Why are you so eager for people to get ripped off all the time?

Yes, I have my gas cost set for the next nine months in my contract. If it went up by 50% I might be annoyed, but firstly I'd have a choice not to have gas and secondly the cost of the renting the allotments haven't gone up by 50%. I also don't think playing just over a fiver a month for a plot of land in Newbury is "being ripped off".

If you're going to be so wrong, don't be so rude.

[Turin Machine]

£5 per month ? darn cheap at the price if you ask me. Bet there's still a waiting list.

[Iommi]

Putting to one side user23's silly ramblings, and the fact I didn't understand the finer points of the issue, the thing that seems most unfair, is that there isn't enough notice given. As Simon Kirkby notes: allotmenteers would need to make commitments for the year before the new rent is advised, thus allotmenteers have made financial commitments, and possibly invested time to commit to a new year before the rate is known.

It seems to me, that it would be better if the council give greater notice. If for example, they gave a years notice, then Simon Kirkby wouldn't have a moral argument in my view.

[dannyboy]

Putting to one side user23's silly ramblings, and the fact I didn't understand the finer points of the issue, the thing that seems most unfair, is that there isn't enough notice given. As Simon Kirkby notes, allotmenteers would need to make commitments for the year before the new rent is advised, thus allotmenteers have made financial commitments, and possibly invested time to commit to a new year before the rate is known.

It seems to me, that it would be better if the council give greater notice. If for example, they gave a years notice, then Simon Kirkby wouldn't have a moral argument in my view.

A year or more in advance gives no contingency for the council. They'd just resort to cancelling every contract & getting every tenant to sign a new one each year.
It would be interesting to know wht the last increases have been over the last 10 years.

[Simon Kirby]

It seems to me, that it would be better if the council give greater notice. If for example, they gave a years notice, then Simon Kirkby wouldn't have a moral argument in my view.

I would have no argument at all with that. It's what I've asked for, and it's pretty much the situation elsewhere.

[Iommi]

Yes, I have my gas cost set for the next nine months in my contract. If it went up by 50% I might be annoyed, but firstly I'd have a choice not to have gas and secondly the cost of the renting the allotments haven't gone up by 50%. I also don't think playing just over a fiver a month for a plot of land in Newbury is "being ripped off"..

At least understand the technical difference between an arbitrary plot of land in Newbury and an allotment plot of land in Newbury. Although I know you already do, but are just being deliberately obtuse.

[Iommi]

Outside of common allotment practice, I do think the money asked is still good value, but I do also think it is important of people to stick-up for their rights as it is always harder to change things later. The ratcheting of the rent could just be the the thin end of the wedge. If allotmenteers act too timidly, they could end up victims of their own deference.

[Simon Kirby]

A year or more in advance gives no contingency for the council. They'd just resort to cancelling every contract & getting every tenant to sign a new one each year.

No contingency? What do you mean? Other councils manage, how is Newbury so different?

It would be interesting to know wht the last increases have been over the last 10 years.

[dannyboy]

Outside of common allotment practice, I do think the money asked is still good value, but I do also think it is important of people to stick-up for their rights as it is always harder to change things later. The ratcheting of the rent could just be the the thin end of the wedge. If allotmenteers act too timidly, they could end up victims of their own deference.

It is ridiculously good value. I bet there is a waiting list as long as my arm.

Biting the hand that feeds.....

[Simon Kirby]

Yes, I have my gas cost set for the next nine months in my contract. If it went up by 50% I might be annoyed, but firstly I'd have a choice not to have gas and secondly the cost of the renting the allotments haven't gone up by 50%. I also don't think playing just over a fiver a month for a plot of land in Newbury is "being ripped off".

Rents went up 47%.

A proposal to increase rents to £25 per pole (that's £250 for my plot) was withdrawn, but it's still on the table, and that would have been a 430% increase - and now only a 360% increase!

There is a very good strategic reason why the Council would not want to give notice of its rent rises: With a year to organise Newbury's allotmenteers might hope to overturn a rent rise like that, so the Town Council want the benefit of surprise.

[Simon Kirby]

I might try this with my gas bill. Refuse to pay any increase in cost yet still take the service they give and then suggest that if all their customers ran the service it would be a lot better.

User, if I'm wrong about the legal position then I lose my allotment, and I'm guessing you're not protesting about that.

But if I'm right about the legal position, are you saying that it's morally wrong of me to insist that the Town Council abides by consumer law?

[Iommi]

It is ridiculously good value. I bet there is a waiting list as long as my arm. Biting the hand that feeds.....

It could be, but that is only one part of the issue. More people should insist that they are treated equitably, as that doesn't seem to be the case at the moment.

[Iommi]

But if I'm right about the legal position, are you saying that it's morally wrong of me to insist that the Town Council abides by consumer law?

I am convinced that user23 and dannyboy are not without prejudice on this issue. For me; I don't think it is currently a lot of money, but I recognise that people should stand up for their rights, although I fear you might be dumping in your own nest. It would be better for you that there were more allotmenteers who thought and acted the same way as you.

[Cognosco]

I am convinced that user23 and dannyboy are not without prejudice on this issue. For me; I don't think it is currently a lot of money, but I recognise that people should stand up for their rights, although I fear you might be dumping in your own nest. It would be better for you that there were more allotmenteers who thought and acted the same way as you.

The amount of money is not really the argument if I understand what Simon is saying. It is about the council not abiding with contractual law. Why should anybody not abide by the law? Surely it should not matter whether it is a company, person or council they should ensure that the law of the land is being upheld. Being a council I would have thought they would be more concerned than other entities that they operated in a legal way? It does seem most unfair to give no notice of a rent increase especially with something like an allotment as Simon explains because of sheds, crops etc which would have to be removed. I would have thought the council would have known twelve months in advance that they would be increasing the rents and by how much. It does seem completely unfair to drop a letter through the letterbox stating a large rent increase one month in advance for something like an allotment.

I thought the council were there to serve the community? Not act like some type of rip off company?



Good luck Simon.

[Iommi]

To be fair, the council without obligation inserted a term that they would reimburse people that wanted out. The problem is it is at a late stage in the process; commitments have already been made.

My 'ire' is the alleged way Simon Kirkby has been treated by the council. The council seem to be behaving without due courtesy. They should not take a challenge in a way that suggests they are taking it personally.

I do hope Simon gets a result, but I am surprised it has gone this far. I would have thought the council would have taken proper legal advice themselves; it is for this reason I am not wholly confident he will win.

[Simon Kirby]

I do hope Simon gets a result, but I am surprised it has gone this far. I would have thought the council would have taken proper legal advice themselves. It is for this reason I am not wholly confident he will win.

Yes, that troubles me too.

[Simon Kirby]

To be fair, the council without obligation inserted a term that they would reimburse people that wanted out.

Not quite. The obligation to reimburse has always been a term of the contract. That the Council have not previously honoured it is grubby, but it was always a right under the contract to be refunded pro-rata if the tenancy ended with time to run.

What the Council are relying on is that they have offered to accept the surrender of the tenancy, but this isn't a contractural term and doesn't affect the period of notice the tenant has to give to end the tenancy as of right. It can't be a contractural term, and nor can it affect the period of notice because that would require either the insertion of a new term or the modification of an existing term and you can't just change the terms of a contract - that's what a contract is, an immutable agreement. At best the Council's offer creates an equitable remedy if the council refused to accept the surrender and sued for the rent, but that's not something the fairness test is concerned with.

[the bloke on the...]

Hello folk of Newbury, what a lively forum your town has!

As the General Secretary of the Great Yarmouth & Gorleston Allotments Association, I have been keeping an eye on this issue for some time.

your town council seem to be over-inflating the cost of providing allotments in Newbury

there are close on a thousand allotment plots in our Borough, spread over 15 sites.
Cost to tax-payer??, go on guess??





yep, Nil, zilch, nothing at all

rgds, The Bloke on the Street