Table of contents:
When house residents argue in court about "companions" in the hallway and courtyard: We present court rulings on this subject.
Every child has it, almost every adult and also more and more seniors: their own vehicle. What the scooters, the bobby car and the stroller are for some are finally the walkers for the other bicycles and in older age. However, all of these vehicles also have to be parked somewhere when they are not in use. And this is where the discussions occasionally begin. The Law and Tax Information Service of the LBS has summarized several judgments of German courts dealing with this problem for its extra edition. It shows that the judiciary understands that rollators and the like have to find their place somewhere. In most cases, there is a ban only if others are disabled.
Judgments in detail
Sometimes it is not easy to carry a stroller into the house. For this reason, parents requested that a ramp be built in front of the entrance door. They were even willing to pay for it. However, the Munich district court (file number 481 C 21932/12, rejected appeal to the regional court in Munich, file number 1 S 19913/13) decided that the apartment owners' association could not be obliged to tolerate such a construction measure against their will. A ramp also brings with it dangers - someone could fall when it is slippery or when moving house.
Children's bicycles and scooters are intended for use outside the home or apartment. If parents allow their offspring to drive around in the hallway and in the rooms of their apartment regularly and accompanied by considerable volume, then this does not have to be accepted. At the request of WEG, the Munich district court (file number 281 C 17481/16) obliged the family to provide rest in the hours from 8 p.m. If this does not happen, a fine can be imposed in the future.
If a cyclist takes a break and places his vehicle on a bike rack, he should chain the bike as much as possible. If it falls over and damages a car, the person concerned is liable. Property damage of around 1, 000 euros had occurred here. The Cologne Regional Court (file number 11 S 387/14) found that a cyclist had to make sure that his vehicle was not dangerous. This was not done to the extent necessary.
If the dimensions of a hallway are suitable for parking a pram, then this must not be prohibited. The landlord, on the other hand, had filed a notice and pointed out a corresponding clause in the rental agreement. The Düsseldorf District Court (file number 22 C 15963/12), however, declared the clause ineffective because it unduly disadvantaged the tenants. At the narrowest point in the hallway, 70 centimeters of free space were left - enough space to be able to escape even in an emergency.
In an apartment building there were two ways to park bicycles, a room in the basement and an area in the yard. But that was not fixed in the contract. One day, the owner prohibited parking in the yard, which the tenants felt was unreasonable, because the accommodation in the basement was very cumbersome. Nevertheless, the district court of Berlin (file number 67 S 70/11) gave the landlord the right. If there is no firm assurance, the permission can be revoked at any time for factual reasons. Here it was difficult, but quite feasible to get the bikes down in the basement.
In view of expensive prams, which can cost a four-digit amount in a correspondingly luxurious version, it is obvious what parents did in Berlin: they chained the pram in the hallway to make theft more difficult. But this can be prohibited if there are problems with traffic safety due to the limited space. A door wing could no longer be opened, and visitors could no longer hold onto the banister. The Berlin Regional Court (file number 63 S 487/08) therefore prohibited the tenants from chaining up at the request of the owners.
If a certain area in an underground car park is declared as a parking space, then this is actually only intended for motor vehicles. If you install a bike stand on it to be able to park your e-bikes, you have to expect difficulties. In the specific case, a majority in the WEG had approved the bike rack, but there were also protests against it. The district court of Hamburg (file number 318 S 167/14) upheld the unsuccessful owner's complaint. There was a purpose in the declaration of division that could not be undermined by a simple majority decision.