Commencing forteiture of lease?

[FaceFullOfFilleronthe45]

I wonder if anyone can advise me on a situation currently affecting a relative of mine please?

This is the scenario:

Owner of a leasehold property has been contacted by the management agent to say there have been several complaints of noise and anti social behaviour and that improvements must be made.

They write again a few months later to say that improvements have NOT been made (according to the complainant) and that if problems continue then they will have no choice but to commence forfeiture of the lease.

The allegedly noisy/anti-social occupant receives a warning letter from the council. This letter states there has been no monitoring so far and no corroboration by third parties but that they write in the first instance on the back of the word of the complainant.

Some months go by with no issues, the management agent confirms in writing to the accused occupant that things are vastly improved. Then the complainant makes two more complaints directly to the occupant and again contacts the managing agent.

What is likely to happen next and what process needs to be gone through in order to either take civil action through the council (noise abatement etc) or in order to seize the property under the conditions of the lease?

TIA.

Surely proof of the incidents is required? What does the lease state with regards to breaches and the procedures? Has the person allegedly making excessive noise received any sort of notice before action? Did any past correspondence state action would be taken if there was a recurrence?

Yes I would imagine so, but that's what I am asking really. What kind of proof is considered sufficient and how would it be collated, over what period etc?

Obviously common sense tells me that one or two isolated incidences are not sufficient to force this outcome, even if they are quite extreme, and any chronic low level disturbance or annoyance would have to be monitored at something above a minimum level and there would need to be witnesses willing to corroborate the allegations?

Not sure about what the lease states, haven't seen it, but I would have thought they are all pretty standard.

Don't make that assumption about the lease. Depending on the property - such as whether it was purpose built and when or is a conversion, the location (conservation area, any restrictive covenants over the land, etc) and the nature of the freeholder there could be unusual terms which apply. The past correspondence on the noise issues should also be referred to.

purpose built, not a conservation area fairly standard flat in a block, I don't anticipate finding anything unusual when I see the lease.

Dont get me wrong, I am not anti the Diva Night idea, I wouldn't be stomping around complaining about it if my DD were in that Brownie pack, I'd let it go. But I do think it's not really what Brownies is about and I'd worry that if things like that were gradually allowed to dominate then they would have sunk to the lowest common denominator and ceased to be such a valuable organisation encouraging the learning of valuable life skills.

whoops wrong thread sorry!

LOL at Diva Night!

Do you suspect someone of trying to gain the leasehold falsely, without paying for it?!