A couple who sued for £180,000 over claims they were driven crazy by the “beep” of a car park intercom inches from their apartment’s only window in a historic city centre have had their compensation bid thrown out.
Zhengfang Huang and his girlfriend Jingjing Chen lost their claim for damages, with Judge Melissa Clarke saying they should have “expected” noise when they rented a flat in the middle of Brighton.
The couple claimed their lives were made a misery by noise emanating from the car park next door to their home in Brighton’s historic Lanes district.
The only window in their rented flat faces onto a pedestrian accessway into the busy parking area, with an alarm and intercom only a few inches below causing them constant noise nuisance, they told London’s High Court.
Suing for up to £180,000, they claimed their sleep, peace and mental health had been shattered by the regular “beep” of the intercom and ticket scanning machine “a few inches” from their window.
But Judge Clarke threw out their £180,000 damages bid, telling them noise should be expected in a busy city centre like Brighton.
“They should have expected this when they rented a city centre apartment on the ground floor,” she said in her ruling last week.
She also rejected the couple’s claim for a temporary injunction to close the car park entrance, but said their injunction case could continue at Brighton County Court.
Giving judgment, Judge Clarke said the couple had rented the flat in the Green Diamond Building, which is situated in Brighton’s busy and historic Lanes district. The area is famous for its Georgian architecture and party atmosphere, fuelled by numerous stag and hen parties.
The couple’s only window opens onto a pedestrian walkway into the car park in Little East Street, which is operated by Brighton and Hove Council.
“It has alarms attached to the walls of the flat which forms the property,” said the judge. “The complaints start with the alarms, which were faulty and which the claimants accept have since been rectified.
“The intercom, which customers use to scan tickets, is a few inches below their window. It beeps. It is used by customers to speak to the control centre of the car park.
“They complain of the door to the pedestrian entrance banging. Customers and third parties gather by the entrance to the car park. Their conversations can be heard through the window of the flat.
“They say they only have one window. They can’t open it without noxious noise and smells coming in.
“They say their sleep has been disturbed, not only by the alarms, which seem to have ceased, but also by the intercom and people coming in and out, shouting late at night.
“They say this has had an effect on their mental health, in particular on Mr Huang.”
The couple had already complained to Brighton Council, which fixed the faulty alarm and deactivated the intercom, although the couple claim it has since been reactivated.
They then sued the council, seeking damages for “psychiatric injury” and a permanent injunction that would close the pedestrian entrance into the car park, pointing out that there is another only seconds away.
The case reached court last week as the couple tried to have the access closed pending resolution of their claim as a whole at a later date.
But refusing them a temporary injunction, Judge Clarke said closing the entrance would have a more detrimental impact on the public than leaving it open would have on the couple.
“They should have known the flat had a single window which opened onto a small lane to a car park entrance where equipment was already installed,” she said.
“In my judgment, it is not just and convenient to grant the injunction at this stage. That’s because I consider that closing a car park entrance to the public, even though there’s another one round the corner, is something which will be more inconvenient to the public and to the council than the inconvenience to the claimants of listening to a door banging and possibly an intercom being used.”
She transferred their claim for an injunction to Brighton County Court, but at the same time “struck out” their compensation claim for the alleged impact on their mental health, citing a lack of evidence.
“Medical documentation has been attached, but no medical report served with the particulars of claim,” she said. “Their case has been given a value of £180,000, but it clearly is not worth £180,000. There’s no possibility of it being worth that.”
The decision means the couple’s bid to close the car park entrance will now go to the county court, but their damages claim for psychiatric injury is struck out.
Energy firms paid out £152 million to vulnerable customers over past six years
Trump promises to bring down the cost of medications
Man fined thousands after failing to take down extension for 15 years
More than one million people still on zero-hours contracts, data shows
Cyber experts issue urgent advice to M&S customers after data breach
Government bans early work of Botticelli from being exported out of UK
