Bungalow problem

Gwenrose

We have a touring caravan that we would like to keep at the bungalow we are in the process of purchasing.

We have just discovered the on the land registry charges it says no caravans, sheds, huts etc can be on the property.

The bungalow was built by a private developer in 1957, they built approx 30 bungalows. These were surrounded by holiday chalets which have since been bought and rebuilt to high standards of property surrounding the private built bungalows. The roads within the estate have not been adopted by the council and the developers of the private built bungalows we believe no longer exist.

We want to keep our caravan at our property and there are a good number of other properties who have caravans on the front drives surrounding our prospective purchase.

Could we change what is on the charge registry and could it be enforced if a neighbour ever complained that they did not want the caravan there.

Any constructive advice would be very welcome.

benjo

My friend lives on a new development of very posh houses and she isnt allowed a caravan on the drive other than for packing, unpacking etc. Her solicitor advised that it wasnt possible to change this.

I dont know if you parked it there, without complaint for a number of years if this would effectively negate the clause, but honestly, Im guessing at that one.

zzzLazyDaisy

Only the original builder can enforce the clause. This obviously matters on a new development, because the developers are still trying to sell houses and don't want caravans etc spoiling the views! But on a more established development, the chances are the original builders won't care (and may even no longer exist). If other people have caravans on their land, then the chances are this won't be an issue.

Note: the above comment only applies to freehold land - if the land is leasehold and the lease contains a similar clause, then the freeholder can enforce it. In that case it may be an idea to consider buying the freehold.

bdl1brick

You need to ask your solicitor but if you like the place you are probably best to just go for it then park it up and see if anyone complains but have a think about what you will do if you can't park it at the bungalow.

I remember seeing on a property program a while ago that there are places you can park a caravan up for the year at a relatively small cost so might be worth trying to find somewhere locally as a backup plan.

Gwenrose

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

Only the original builder can enforce the clause. This obviously matters on a new development, because the developers are still trying to sell houses and don't want caravans etc spoiling the views! But on a more established development, the chances are the original builders won't care (and may even no longer exist). If other people have caravans on their land, then the chances are this won't be an issue.

Note: the above comment only applies to freehold land - if the land is leasehold and the lease contains a similar clause, then the freeholder can enforce it. In that case it may be an idea to consider buying the freehold.

Many thanks for your reply and yes the land is freehold.

Richard_Webster

Only the original builder can enforce the clause. This obviously matters on a new development, because the developers are still trying to sell houses and don't want caravans etc spoiling the views! But on a more established development, the chances are the original builders won't care (and may even no longer exist). If other people have caravans on their land, then the chances are this won't be an issue.

Note: the above comment only applies to freehold land - if the land is leasehold and the lease contains a similar clause, then the freeholder can enforce it. In that case it may be an idea to consider buying the freehold.

This isn't technically correct, but does represent a simplified answer, which many would be happy with.

Anyone who can show that he has the benefit of the covenant can enforce it. So if builder sold off land in plots it may possible to prove that a plot sold after the original sale of the the plot in question had the benefit of the covenants and therefore its owner could enforce the covenants. Most people don't know this and a neighbour trying to use this method of enforcement would face a lot of legal costs and hassle to do so. They have to be pretty screwed up and cross to do this.

Most neighbours won't care and may well not realise that there is such a covenant.

Usually they try complaining to the Council under Planning and the Council tells them its nothing to do with them!

If you can show that there has been a continuous breach of such a covenant by parking a caravan there for 20 years on your plot then it becomes unenforceable. This is based on a 100 year old case and it is possible that if the point came before a court now a shorter period would be considered sufficient to prevent a remedy being obtained.

So the practical answer is just to station the caravan there and see what happens - probably nothing. You do need to be aware of the risks, but they are usually pretty small.

Gwenrose

Richard_Webster wrote: »

This isn't technically correct, but does represent a simplified answer, which many would be happy with.

Anyone who can show that he has the benefit of the covenant can enforce it. So if builder sold off land in plots it may possible to prove that a plot sold after the original sale of the the plot in question had the benefit of the covenants and therefore its owner could enforce the covenants. Most people don't know this and a neighbour trying to use this method of enforcement would face a lot of legal costs and hassle to do so. They have to be pretty screwed up and cross to do this.

Most neighbours won't care and may well not realise that there is such a covenant.

Usually they try complaining to the Council under Planning and the Council tells them its nothing to do with them!

If you can show that there has been a continuous breach of such a covenant by parking a caravan there for 20 years on your plot then it becomes unenforceable. This is based on a 100 year old case and it is possible that if the point came before a court now a shorter period would be considered sufficient to prevent a remedy being obtained.

So the practical answer is just to station the caravan there and see what happens - probably nothing. You do need to be aware of the risks, but they are usually pretty small.

Thank you Richard, that sounds reasuring.

Many thanks again.