Definition of 'family'

InvisibleWoman

Is there a legal definition of family, in particular in relation to discrimination? Would a married couple be considered a family?

Peregrinus

InvisibleWoman wrote: »

Is there a legal definition of family, in particular in relation to discrimination? Would a married couple be considered a family?

The Equal Status Acts forbids discrimination on a number of grounds, two of which are "family status" and "marital status". If people are discrminated against on the grounds that they are married (or on the grounds that they aren't) they don't have to show, or argue, that they are a "family"; they can object that they are being discriminated against on the grounds of marital status.

"Family status", for what it's worth, is defined. It means "being pregnant or having responsibility—

(a) as a parent or as a person in loco parentis in relation to a person who has not attained the age of 18 years, or

(b) as a parent or the resident primary carer in relation to a person of or over that age with a disability which is of such a nature as to give rise to the need for care or support on a continuing, regular or frequent basis.

So basically, if you are pregnant or have a child or a disabled adult who is depdendent on your care, you have "family status". Simply being married does not give you family status.

InvisibleWoman

Im trying to word this carefully so I stay within forum rules. Could the rights of a family be viewed as more important than the rights of a married couple?

Im struggling so mods please tell me off if I've gone too far.

We own our apartment. The neighbours rent. Their landlord installed tiles and laminate which we believe breach the building regulations and the development rules. The impact noise keeps us awake until 2am and starts again at dawnish as its directly over our bedrooms. The landlord will only fix a small portion of the flooring, stating as we are 'only a couple', we don't need to use the extra bedrooms. Our management company said we should be grateful the landlord will do anything and seem to be washing their hands of the matter, but I don't see why their landlord gets to choose how many of our bedrooms are habitable given we own our home.

I'm trying to work out if we are being discrimated against, as I'm hoping if I add that to my list of areas to chase, they'll surrender and just fix the blasted floors!

Losty Dublin

InvisibleWoman wrote: »

Im trying to word this carefully so I stay within forum rules. Could the rights of a family be viewed as more important than the rights of a married couple?

Im struggling so mods please tell me off if I've gone too far.

We own our apartment. The neighbours rent. Their landlord installed tiles and laminate which we believe breach the building regulations and the development rules. The impact noise keeps us awake until 2am and starts again at dawnish as its directly over our bedrooms. The landlord will only fix a small portion of the flooring, stating as we are 'only a couple', we don't need to use the extra bedrooms. Our management company said we should be grateful the landlord will do anything and seem to be washing their hands of the matter, but I don't see why their landlord gets to choose how many of our bedrooms are habitable given we own our home.

I'm trying to work out if we are being discrimated against, as I'm hoping if I add that to my list of areas to chase, they'll surrender and just fix the blasted floors!

In other words your issue is the noise eminating from your neighbours and the steps another landlord is taking to appease you isn't enough for you and your partner. Perhaps a solicitor can define it better but how you and the law would consider it to be a form of discrimination will be very different.

If you feel that there is a breach of planning laws or development then you may well need to follow up on a formal legal basis.

Ken.

As an owner you are the management company. What do the rules of the development say?. Did you bring it up at the AGM?

InvisibleWoman

The rules of the management company say 'floor coverings must deaden sound'.

The next AGM isn't until September.

The landlord is a social housing trust and they own 15 properties within the development.

Sadly I have a long thread in Accommodation and Property, but ventured over here to Legal temporarily to try and define discrimation a bit better.

Im already chasing up building regulations with the council amongst other avenues. Problem is, the housing trust will be happy to drag it in indefinitely while we suffer every day.

Peregrinus

Your domestic arrangements are your own affair, and are no concern of the neighbouring property owner. If the fit-out of the property next door is sub-standard and your property is being adversely affected, it's irrelevant that you are not using all of your bedrooms for sleeping in, or whatever.

In this dispute arguments about discrimination are a red herring, to be honest, and you would be better off avoiding them. The issue is whether activities in the neighbouring flat are causing a nuisance in your flat and, if so, whether this is due to unreasonable activities, or poor construction, or a bit of both. Proving your case could be difficult; focus on that and do not get distracted with arguments about discrimination.

My guess is that the neighbouring property owner, while denying that he has any liablity, has offered to put in some better insulation in order to solve the problem. He thinks, or hopes, that if he offers to put in insulation which will improve the situation in the bedroom you sleep in, you will accept that as a compromise, out of fear that if you hold out to have the whole problem fixed you may lose and get nothing done.

Mr. Incognito

This is not discrimination on family status.

This is a dispute between neighbours over repair noise.

Your legal remedy is taking an injunction, moving or sucking it up.

What a ridiculous idea that you are being discriminated against.

InvisibleWoman

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

What a ridiculous idea that you are being discriminated against.

I appreciate (now) that we may not be discriminated against in the legal sense of the word but I don't think the question was ridiculous. We were told that we are 'only a couple' and so we shouldn't have brought a large apartment, and various other comments. We were and still are very upset as we feel we made to feel 'less' just because we don't have children.

We are taking other steps to resolve the matter, but we have also been told this is likely to take several years. This is why we wanted to know if there was perhaps an additional area to explore. Courtesy of the Legal forum, we are aware that this isn't an option.

Mods, please close the thread as the question has been answered.

Victor

The 'traditional' legal definition of 'family' is a married couple, with or without children.

InvisibleWoman wrote: »

We own our apartment. The neighbours rent. Their landlord installed tiles and laminate which we believe breach the building regulations and the development rules. The impact noise keeps us awake until 2am and starts again at dawnish as its directly over our bedrooms. The landlord will only fix a small portion of the flooring, stating as we are 'only a couple', we don't need to use the extra bedrooms. Our management company said we should be grateful the landlord will do anything and seem to be washing their hands of the matter, but I don't see why their landlord gets to choose how many of our bedrooms are habitable given we own our home.

It would seem that the landlord and/or the tenant broke the law and are now trying to reduce / minimise their responsibilities.

You could make a complaint to the Building Control (breach of building regulations) or Environmental Health (noise nuisance, note there are rules) sections in your local council.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

This is not discrimination on family status.

It is. If they had a family, they would be treated differently. The problem might be establishing a direct link between the OP and the neighbour / their landlord so as to bring the Equal Status Act into play.

Mr. Incognito

Victor wrote: »

It is. If they had a family, they would be treated differently.

Quite the leap there. No evidence of that. The chap will just have the next ready made excuse.