Paying for parking while other roommates don't?

I'm sharing an apartment with 2 other girls. We're all on the lease. They've been living at this apartment longer than I have and have "claimed" the 2 spots that come with our apartment. I read the lease agreement and it states that

"In addition to the monthly rent for the Premises, Lessee agreees to pay to Lessor addional rent for each month during the term of this lease as follows: $0 as rent for 2 parking space(s) space number(s) __ "

So by reading this, it states that they don't pay for these parking spots. Now, I just recently bought a brand new car (out of state). Any ways, my roommates are not for the idea of sharing and roatating the parking spots. One girl says that she doesn't want to park on the street because her license plates are from out of state and says that her car is at greater risk of getting tickets/towed because of her out of state plates. The other girl doesn't want to park on the street because her car is also brand new and doesn't want to leave it on the street for fear that someone might break in, steal or damage it. They told me that there's additional parking for $60/month and if I want a parking spot to pay that.

I find it really silly that they have these excuses while at the same time, their excuses are relatable to myself. My car is brand new and has out of state plates too. Why shouldn't i be allowed to park there as well? Now, my question is, if I get the extra parking spot, should I have to pay the entire $60 and they not pay nothing for their spot? or should it be divided? They voiced that they don't want to split the $60. What would be the best approach for this situation? 

At least as posted you all have equal rights to use the 2 places --now whether the drama is worthwhile is another story  --but I'd take view that first come first serve --which may or may not fit your schedules.

As an aside unless you are bona fide nonresident military stationed in CA be careful about  failure to properly get CA license and registration. Some students was to be CA residents for cheap instate tuition but not residents for taxes,fees and insurances.  Be careful!

The lease is the contract between the landlord and the three of you.  It doesn't govern the relationship among you.

I assume that before you moved in, you discussed terms with the other girls.  Things like which bedroom would be yours, what your bathroom, laundry and kitchen rights would be, how much rent you'd be paying, and what chores you'd be expected to do.

I'm guessing you didn't create a written agreement, but all that means is you have a verbal contract instead.

If you discussed parking at that time, then you need to honor what you agreed on then.  You can try to renegotiate, but it's up to them whether they're willing to change your deal.

If you did not ask for parking privileges before you moved in, then even though no words were spoken about it, you agreed to live there without a parking space.

It's true that if all three of you are paying the same share of the rent and getting the same value (no bedroom is bigger than the others or has a better view, you all have equal bathroom facilities, etc.) other than the parking amenity, then for one of you to lose out on that is unfair.  But your verbal contract does not have to be fair.  The first ones in a shared rental can offer a "take it or leave it" deal to a prospective new roommate, and the new one has to choose the unfair deal or look elsewhere for a place to live.

I don't agree that failure to address address a point constitutes agreement on some terms on which there was no agreement

Drew, in this case I think it speaks to what she agreed to.  In general, the onus was on her to ask, before moving in, just what she would be getting for her rent money.

It is theoretically possible that because the other two had parking spaces she erroneously assumed she would get a parking space too, but the original post seems to indicate that she has lived there a while already without using any parking and is only now wanting a space for her new car.

I am not a lawyer.

I can only say what I would more than likely do.  I'd more than likely pay the $60 bucks to keep my car safe.  I would then more than likely find another place to live as soon as I could.

That's certainly not legal advise.  I just know, that's what I would do.  Sometimes you have to cut off your leg to save yourself.  This just doesn't sound like it's worth the fight.  It's not at all fair.  But, in my humble little opinion, it's not worth the fight.

For whatever my opinion is worth

Good luck!

I'm sorry, I continue to disagree --there is apparently a written lease and the four corners of that paperwork define what is in the package --which is 2 spaces .

Unless there was a clear separate agreement among the three women that the newcommer does not get a parking space I fail to see where the first two can invent such an agreement now.

So if the OP approaches parking as first come first serve--sure there may be lots of "drama" but I'm not sure the first two have any winnable points in court and they cannot toss her from the lease.

Sure, should have been addressed earlier --but as it is it is not a slam dunk either way.

If you were a tenant of theirs vs. being a co-tenant, then they'd arguably be in a position to change the deal going forward if the lease didn't address the topic of you and a parking space.

It appears that you all have no formal agreement amongst yourselves -- namely a roommate agreement (highly recommended in future by the way).

I'd say "first come, first served" like Drew, if the co-tenants don't want to come to a different rotation arrangement.  But there's probably a matter of a parking permit, yes (hopefully not a general one but one for a particular space)?  (If so and if for a particular space number, I'd pester the landlord for one and, if need be, be prepared to file a petition against landlord in the local landlord-tenant court to force it to cough one up, since it knows no more than one car can be parked in a space at a time.  You can't force the landlord if unassigned parking passes to cough up a third, however ... at least not under current agreement.)  A parking space, even outside a supposedly "gated community" doesn't ensure no damage or theft will occur, of course.

"They told me that there's additional parking for $60/month and if I want a parking spot to pay that."

This argument only works if you don't want to force the "first come/home gets the space" angle.

"... if I get the extra parking spot, should I have to pay the entire $60 and they not pay nothing for their spot?"

Not a winnable point if the landlord's only obligated to provide parking spaces for two cars and the spaces aren't assigned (to start forcing the "first come, first park").

Drew:

Unless there was a clear separate agreement among the three women that the newcommer does not get a parking space I fail to see where the first two can invent such an agreement now.

So if the OP approaches parking as first come first serve--sure there may be lots of "drama" but I'm not sure the first two have any winnable points in court and they cannot toss her from the lease.

Sure, should have been addressed earlier --but as it is it is not a slam dunk either way.

I think if this issue went to court, the judge would try to determine where the minds met at the time the unwritten contract was entered into.

So if the other two told her she would get such-and-such bedroom as hers, and one shelf in the refrigerator, etc., etc. - with NO mention of her getting any parking privileges - the "meeting of the minds" at that time was that the new roommate was not getting any parking rights.

I don't agree that failure to address it constitutes agreement that it is not in the package --at best its a coint toss. The lease says there are two parking spaces. OP signed the lease --now the original two gals probably created the ambiguity by failing to address no parking was in the deal up front  (perhaps they did but its risky to put such stuff to oral contracts) 

We don't know what the LL's role is under the lease as to parking and any permits and assignments  --so go read the lease  --and to some extent if the LL's words of the lease which he crafted create a problem then LL has a duty to help solve it. But in general I don't think LL needs to resolve socal "drama" among co tenants.  If parking requires a permit the LL might be required to issue  OP a permit and the the women fight for first come first serve --if the lease says it included 2 permits well 2 is 2 not 3.

(Parking is a big deal around me for LL's and by law they are supposed to provide it and let's say some of them have it but they do not make it available to tenants and other games)

For all we know the oral deal was lets split everything 3 ways  and if its a 3 bdrm unit that may be logical  and its not rocket science to split 2 spaces 3 ways on some rotation.

We discussed all things minus the parking. Since I didn't have a car when I first moved in, they said we'd talk about it later. However, now that I have gotten one, they don't seem to want to talk about it or are open to any of my suggestions. 

Aside from roommate drama is there any reason you cannot just start using the space if you get there first? So you do it --what can they do?

I think they may have outsmarted themselves if factually you are correct that they expressly excluded any agreement about parking ---the lease itself grants occupants  2 spaces --thats what counts and if you are correct there was NO agreement not to include parking among your amenities.

Cess:

they said we'd talk about it later.

Oh, great.  That means there was no meeting of the minds.

Getting the court system involved was never a practical option anyway (small claims court is only for money claims), so unless one of you is crazy enough to hire a lawyer and sue in regular court over this, how you handle it is going to be about negotiation and the three of you getting along OK, not about what's legal.

You'll have to guess whether your parking in one of the spots whenever you get home first will make them angry and result in their doing their best to make your life a misery, whether letting them hog the 2 parking spots will lead them to decide you're a pushover and start pushing you around more and more, and if both might be true, then which is worse.

The way they sidestepped the issue at the time and are now resisting any sharing suggests they might be a little immature.  Might be best to make plans to move somewhere else when your lease is up.