In a major panic over covenant/stipulation - please help!

JazzyJ

Incisor wrote: »

In this case, it has gone through planning, so objectors have already had an opportunity.

We have gone through planning too, and we had not objections. My main question is if our outbuilding has never had residential planning, how can we have a stipulation that says that it can only be a single private residence - it has always been part residential and part commercial.

Premier_2

JazzyJ wrote: »

I read so much stuff last night that I am not sure. I have looked through my history, but the only thing I can find is this, but this says the developer/company must have gone bust:

http://www.diyconveyance.co.uk/restrictive-covenants.html

Aye, but it does also say:

Unless the transfer has been worded to allow your neighbours to enforce it (known as mutally enforcable covenant); your conveyancer will be able to advise you if this is the case.

Premier_2

JazzyJ wrote: »

We have gone through planning too, and we had not objections. My main question is if our outbuilding has never had residential planning, how can we have a stipulation that says that it can only be a single private residence - it has always been part residential and part commercial.

As you have already discovered

JazzyJ wrote:

...planning is completely separate from any restrictions or covenants. When planning is agreed, they do not check the deeds to ascertain if the house owner is actually allowed to do what they are planning to do...

Just because you have planning consent, an order enforcing the orginal covenant can still be applied for and granted. (unless it's been breached for 20 years apparently)

JazzyJ

Thank you but I am still majorly worried and confused. Is the stipulation 'Not to use the property other than as a single private residence' likely to cause us a major problem or is it likely that we might be able to get it sorted quickly by indemnity insurance?

Incisor

JazzyJ wrote: »

Thank you but I am still majorly worried and confused. Is the stipulation 'Not to use the property other than as a single private residence' likely to cause us a major problem or is it likely that we might be able to get it sorted quickly by indemnity insurance?

Don't get drawn into thinking about this. This is specifics, not principles. Take it to your solicitor and take the advice. Avoid having it explained too much, just take the advice. IANAL.

Richard_Webster

If you are selling it is up to the buyer to sort things out. If he buys it and uses it in breach of covenant then he might get sued - you won't. Of course he may not be prepared to buy it with the covenant on it.

JazzyJ

Just to tie this up (hopefully), I spoke to our solicitor this morning who wasn't in the least concerned about it. He said we could either leave it and see if the buyer is concerned or if his solicitor even notices it(!) or we take out indemnity. Our solicitor said he will get a few quotes in so we can be ready.

Now, I am concerned that our lender will want us to repay some of our mortgage in order to release some of their security, so that is the next hurdle! I spoke to them today and have written to them (to save on solicitors fees), so will probably be next week before we hear back. Fingers crossed they won't want a wedge back.

Trentenders

My advice would be to get an indemnity quote from an insurance broker - who won't be charging you ?£150 an hour for their services.

You'll probably be able to get a policy for a relatively small amount, and as they are life-long policies, you can avoid having exactly the same problem when you come to sell the house.