Ambiguous terms in tenancy agreement

[mad_abbot]

Hi All,

Short story cut long:

The other day someone set a small bonfire on their plot (we'll ignore the fact that they then left it unattended) and one of the groundsmen from the Parish Council put it out.

He then sent out an email to all plotholders quoting our tenancy agreement ‘Not to do anything which will cause nuisance to any householder by, for example (but not exclusively), lighting bonfires or accumulation of vermin’ and stated that under no circumstances can bonfires be lit and that failure to comply could result in eviction.

Cambourne is a new development and the allotments are very isolated, there is a school 300yds in one direction and a pair of cottages about the same distance in the opposite direction, the plot with the fire was about in the middle and therefore unlikely to cause  nuisance, especially as the school is closed for the summer.

As Chairman I wrote to the PC and questioned their quoting of the tenancy agreement. The way I understand it, if it doesn't cause a nuisance you can do it, if it does, dont.

I don't want to start a full on weeing contest but I am an obstreperous pedant and don't take kindly to the highhanded manner the PC try to deal with us especially as they don't see fit to consult the Association.

Anyway, ignoring the rights and wrongs of bonfires, how do you interpret the wording of the tenancy agreement?

[Jeannine]

I think they blew it with "not to do anything which" WILL "cause nuisance, it is the word will.

If they had written MIGHT cause nusiance it is vague enough that they could argue it has the chance of being a problem, but to put WILL is a lot more definate,in other words once the bonfire was lit   it is a given that it has caused  a nuisance....I would ask for the proof which person was actually nuisanced by it.

Lighting a fire in itself will not automatically be a problem, it might..but they can't state categorically that it will.

I like the other bit best though. it's a winner.."accumulation of vermin"  Now I could be wrong but I believe accumulating means collecting  or receiving or keeping.So I wonder what you are all doing over there to warrant this clause.

Do you maintain a collective  rat sanctuary, or perhaps have a shed full of squirrells you are saving for something..maybeyou keep pet  badgers in the rain butts of foxes in the manure pile or perhaps all of the above. My advice is let them all go before he comes back.I think that's best.

What a truly daft world we live in sometimes.

XX Jeannine

[manicscousers]

possibly the person who had to put it out was annoyed ?

[Unwashed]

No, the rule as it's written doesn't unambiguously ban bonfires, it bans nuisance bonfires.  If the intention was to ban binfires it would have said "no bonfires".  Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 gives the consumer the benefit of ambiguosly worded terms.

The Council workman is also trespassing when she goes onto a plot without permission.

That said it's all too common for an allotmenteer to stink-up the neighbourhood by burning cabbage stumps or green couch grass - what was it the allotmenteer was burning at this time of year?  Was it making excessive smoke?

[Borlotti]

Last time I had a bonfire on my allotment the wind changed direction and it did smoke.  Very dry at the moment but not sure a good idea to have a bonfire when it is so dry, and not sure of the rules about times of the year they are allowed.  Anyway after the allotment neighbour, with her washing out, screaming and swearing at me and treatening me with the police I rushed to the water butt and put it out.  Never again will I have a bonfire, maybe on November 5 but it is too wet then.  Other people have burnt stuff but some have got shouted at and some not.  Anyway I compost now, or wait for the Council pick up truck and load it on that.  That woman was really, really scary, and I would hate to upset anyone, but thought she was a bit over the top, as it was only a bit of smoke.  I like the smell of bonfires but I never saw that she had her washing out, I suppose it would have annoyed me a bit.

[lilyjean]

I'm always hesitant when it comes to bonfires, but the fact is some things do need to be burned. I always try to be sensitive and considerate when I decide to light a a bonfire. Obviously the main key is the wind but that can be so unpredictable. I tend to light mine as late in the evening as possible. Hopefully there isn't any washing out in the nearby vicinity.And also, I mainly burn during the week rather than at weekends.

I hate having my freedom taken away! and I hate this feeling of 'do I or do I not'....surely a little common sense, sensitivity and courtesy should be acceptable...duh I dunno!! 

[Robert_Brenchley]

I have about one bonfire a year to dispose of hedge cuttings, but we don't have close neighbours. I think the answer will have to vary from site to site.

[Unwashed]

The OP's question was more how to interpret the ambiguous rule rather than whether the rule, however you interpret it, is right.

[mad_abbot]

Thanks all. It's good to get some unbiased views.

The issue was never the subject of the rule, but the wording and it's enforceability.