Restrictive Covenants

SKILL

SKILL

SKILL

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
7,243
Location
Melksham
Quick, ish, hopefully, question :p

So I'm looking into buying a house and fairly late in the stage the issue of a restrictive covenant has come to light (ex-council house).

The covenant basically states any extensions/outbuildings must have permission. The seller didn't follow this and hasn't had any issues for a number of years, and has offered to buy indemnity insurance (without me asking).

Now I'm half-thinking loft conversion, way down the line, which I believe would breach the covenant, and/or void the insurance (without permission at least, and not sure why they'd ever give me permission).

So after speaking to my solicitor last week I asked them to ask the seller to get retrospective consent rather than insurance. Which they've 'not agreed' to do.

So what to do, buy anyway and hope for the best, or put an ultimatum to the vendor of retrospective consent or '...' (dropped price? no sale?) We haven't exchanged yet but it's all in place to do so.

And obviously I've had an email from the solicitor earlier but not had a chance to speak and nothing will be done until Tuesday at the earliest, fun 4 days ahead...
 
A loft conversion is permitted development (assuming you stay within the restrictions laid down). It is not an outbuilding, nor an extension.
 
Its a non issue. I recently did a full renovation including and extension and blocking up doors and replacing windows with french doors.

Covenant states no changes to external appearance. Well the same covenant is on the entire road. An entire road with extensions, Conservatories, loft conversions etc etc.

My Layer said keep schtum and don't seek approval.

The covenant will be set by the original land owner. Even if its now freehold it can have covenants. The last thing you want to do is notify/ask permission. They will say no or yes but would want 10's 000's. The family who owned the land on my recent one has a member in france who is a complete ass.

Indemnity insurance is the way to go and its only about £45.
 
The problem I have is that it's an outbuilding that breached the covenant, and my understanding is that the covenant holders could get an order for me to knock it down.

Now the insurance would cover the costs, and even some 'compensation' in some arbitrary loss of house value bit, but ultimately I'd end up with a big pile of debt for a house that no longer suits my needs, hence having to either rebuild the outbuilding (with permission :p) or move which isn't exactly cheap.
 
Best thing is get some legal advice.

There's also the fact that if someone is informed.. don't act.. then it's considered that they have not objected.

All the houses in a building development inherit restrictive covenants from the original building permission.

We have that the building must look the same (i.e. no rendering) just so the area looks 'samey' but as there's a large number of conservatories and ours had a new conservatory in about 2005 we had indemnity insurance.. no one has given a damn.

I want to make the conservatory an orangery - that may be different as it would be a single storey extension..
 
SKILL said:
The problem I have is that it's an outbuilding that breached the covenant, and my understanding is that the covenant holders could get an order for me to knock it down.

Now the insurance would cover the costs, and even some 'compensation' in some arbitrary loss of house value bit, but ultimately I'd end up with a big pile of debt for a house that no longer suits my needs, hence having to either rebuild the outbuilding (with permission :p) or move which isn't exactly cheap.
Click to expand...

Yes they "Could" get an order. However the fact that this type of insurance is so cheap goes a way to demonstrate how rarely that happens.

How would they ever know you have an outhouse without trespassing to check.

Plus it'll cost them money to get the order. And at the end of the day whats in it for them.
 
NickK said:
There's also the fact that if someone is informed.. don't act.. then it's considered that they have not objected.
Click to expand...


That bit is fairly risky though. If they don't know and there is a reasonable chance they would never ever find out then waving a flag could very well get them to ask that it be knocked down or for thousands£££
 
Usually the builders add Restrictive Covenants to stop people doing stuff while the estate is still being built and sold. Once the developer has cleared off then usually they don't care.

My 100 year old house has them but as everyone in the street has already broke them, it wouldn't put me off doing anything. Also a council won't refuse planning permission because of a Restrictive Covenant, as it is a civil matter between the property owner and covenant owner.
 
It's a council based covenant, rather than builder/land owner, although not sure how much difference that makes.

I will be speaking to my solicitor on Tuesday but got the latest update via email only just before an extra long weekend, great for the stress levels :p

The more I think about it the more I don't think the risk is worth it, so unless my mind changes drastically I'll be offering the option of getting the retrospective consent or a big (as in insulting, I want the consent more than I want to save the money) drop in the price.
 
These covenants are totally standard practice and put in place when council houses are sold to protect the amenity of the area. They are entirely separate to any planning or building regulations issue.

My experience is that these are dealt with very informally. Request comes in, someone relatively junior has a quick look at the drawings and provided it's not ridiculous and doesn't affect any council properties they'll send a letter back saying they don't have a problem with it.

If it's been up several years and nobody has noticed yet, you can be reasonably confident that they won't take any action. They wouldn't take any action simply because it had been built without consent, it would have to be having a serious impact. I think this would have to go to the High Court so it would cost the council thousands to put a case together and instruct counsel.

If I were you I'd write (or get your solicitor to) to the council's property department and ask them to confirm they have no objections to the existing outbuilding. You'll almost certainly get a reply saying they don't. In the meantime, knock the vendor down a bit.
 
Depends on who has put the covenant in place. It may actually no longer be relevant or enforceable anyway, but best to take advice. We have a restrictive covenant on our property which we had to write to the estate management company to gain their permission for works. £120 later we have written confirmation and it wasn't too much of a headache. We went through a bit of a dilemma with a number of planning and building control issues thinking it's easier for the authorities to say no, but actually apart from the water board who have been a nightmare, everyone has been fantastic.

If your plans are reasonable and in keeping with what others have done and with the local area, it's likely to go through. Research is key, as is patience... Most of these departments like to have 6 weeks to think things through.

In terms of chancing it, if you're planning a forever home that you're not moving from for many years I would be more inclined to wing it rather than go through the official channels. It's when you come to sell up that it could be a headache.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom