Explanation of legal jargon.

royP_2

I am at present purchasing a house and have received a copy of a couple of restrictive covenents that applied to the land when it was first purchased 1980, and before the house was built, one bothers me slightly but perhaps I am mis-understanding the language.

This is it;
No building erected on the land hereby transferred shall be rebuilt or added to or altered externally and no new building shall be errected on the land hereby transferred without prior consent in writing of the Transferor.

Does this mean I would need consent before adding an extension?

From the other paperwork it seems that planning permission was granted in July 1979 and the land was transfered in August 1980, a year later, so I assume consent was given for the original build.

Views please.

Fire_Fox

What does your conveyancing solicitor say?

Richard_Webster

No building erected on the land hereby transferred shall be rebuilt or added to or altered externally and no new building shall be errected on the land hereby transferred without prior consent in writing of the Transferor.

Does this mean I would need consent before adding an extension?

Yes, this is entirely separate from Planning and Building Regulations.

If he is local, your solicitor may have local knowledge and know how easy or otherwise it will be to obtain such a consent in the future if you want to build an extension or conservatory. If you are not sure, writing to the "transferor" is dangerous because if you do not get a reply, or you get a negative reply or one demanding a large sum of money, then the alternative of a restrictive covenant indemnity policy will not be available to you.

If the "transferor" is a company that no longer exists then it will not be possible to get the consent and the covenant is unenforceable.

royP_2

Many thanks for your reply Richard.

The company that owned the land and built the original house was Broseley Estates.

I understand that Broseley Estates was sold to Trafalgar House in December 1986 / January 1987, does this therefore mean that the covenant still applies?

Richard_Webster

I understand that Broseley Estates was sold to Trafalgar House in December 1986 / January 1987, does this therefore mean that the covenant still applies?

You will have to check the precise company name and its number if you have it.

A Ltd could be set up in 1975 with number 123456 and change its name to B Ltd in 1987 and the another company A could then have been set up with a different number. It is the first company you are interested in, not the second - you can tell by going to http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/6f2c897ba76401edf6ba1592db0bc40f/wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo

Try "Current/Recently Dissolved Names" first then go on to "Dissolved Names" and finally to "Previous names". If it changed its name before some time in the 1980s the computer records may not go back that far and you would have to make a specific enquiry which you could not do for free on line.

It is important therefore that you find out the precise name of the company which sold the land in 1980 and find the number of that company and see if it still exists.

For instance Broseley Estates Limited was incorporated in 1919 as company 00155892 and changed its name in October 1990 to Ideal Homes North West Limited and is now dormant with its registered office at Persimmon's HQ in York! If that is the right company then the covenant is still enforceable.