Restricive Covenant

dudes_2

I am looking at buying a house, and it has a restrictive covenant.

Any changes to the property need to be approved by the sellers. The property is listed, so I find this quite annoying, as it theory it could also apply to interior and gardens (which generally are excluded from the listed rules). And any changes I do wish to make to the exterior will need to be approved twice!

Is there any way a restrictive covenant can be removed in the future if I go ahead? Anyone gots any ideas how I can persuade them to drop this restrictive covenant now?

Dudes

Milliewilly

I always avoid things like this. It really annoys me that someone sells a house but want to enjoy any potential benefits in the future. Like planning uplift clauses - they sell they walk away from potential profit or get the planning and do the work themselves.

Sorry for the rant - doesn't help you. I would look elsewhere unless its really unique and you desperately want it. I would ask they remove it as a condition of sale.

F_T_Buyer

Is this the people who are selling to you? I would say no full stop.

However, is this covenant from owners way back? I.e. the sellers agreed to it when they bought?

tintaja

Does it mean that the owners are converting the house into a leasehold property and are keeping the freehold? i would never buy a leasehold house, (or leasehold flat for that matter, although i can understand the point of leasehold if the case of flats. Houses - nope). it is a horrible feeling, having to ask someone for permission every time you want to make changes to your home. Never again.

We owned a leasehold flat and removed some of the restrictive covenants - it can a costly process, as you may need to employ solicitor(s) to prepare licence for alterations or draw a new lease. If i were you I would negotiate now - they are keen to sell, so you are in a much better bargaining position now, before the deal is sealed.

Fire_Fox

Tell the owners to drop the covenant or they will lose their buyer.

dudes_2

It is a freehold. No, the covenant is not from way back, it is from the sellers who have other properties in the same town, so have an interest in the look of the area.

But the property is listed anyway, so not that much can change.

Fire_Fox

So the covenant isn't being imposed by the vendors, it was added by a previous owner of the property??

g_attrill

dudes wrote: »

It is a freehold. No, the covenant is not from way back, it is from the sellers who have other properties in the same town, so have an interest in the look of the area.

But the property is listed anyway, so not that much can change.

The thing is, the listed building rules can be challenged, so if permision is unreasonably declined you could appeal to have it overruled. However with a convenant I bet it would harder and hugely expensive if they suddenly said "no" if you wanted (or needed) to do some changes. That said, if you went ahead and breached it then they would need to put up or shut up.

dudes_2

Fire_Fox wrote: »

So the covenant isn't being imposed by the vendors, it was added by a previous owner of the property??

It is being imposed by the vendors

g_attrill - Yes, I agree. No idea what they would do.

G_M

If there is a clear reason for this, like the house is one of a series all of which used to belong to an estate (in the old sense of the word) and all of which have a distinct character, then I can understand the rationale. Especially if the vendor retains, say the manor house within which's boundaries these properties fall.

Otherwise I would insist on the covenant being removed from the contract, or would walk away.

My general rule would be, I'm buying the house, I want control (subject of course to planning and other law) over what I do with my house.