Can a Housing Association still maintain rights over a 100% owned freehold property?

rhubarb1

Thank you Mrs Manda that is helpful. I realise that for such alterations you would need planning permission anyway. But to have to obtain written permission for things that would not require planning permission seems trite somehow.
I wonder if they also have the right to tell us to move our border wall?

ILW

rhubarb1 wrote: »

Wow you lot are sympathetic aren't you? It's like being on mumsnet.

Fine, forget the emotional issue and the 'bowl of soup' - patronisation, thanks. We've just spent over a grand on solicitors fees and searches and mortgage fees. Not at any one stage did either the Agents or our solicitors bring this clause up.

Now our solicitor is telling me that this is a very common clause and should we buy a different house, we may find that clause in there. Can I ask how many of you home-owners have this clause in your contracts?

We may well walk away from this purchase because it will affect future sales of the house. Who wants to buy a house outright only to find that they need written permission to do anything to it?

I think it's an unreasonable clause. It's unreasonable to add it now to the transfer of the lease. It's unreasonable not to tell the buyer about it until the last minute.

When I posted this I thought I might get some helpful advice about whether or not it was a natural pitfall of buying an ex-HA house and perhaps even some experiences of how others have dealt with it, whether or not it was a big deal and perhaps ways around it. I guess I'm naive about peoples good nature.

FWIW, I didn't even raise my voice to the solicitor and doubt I will do so to anyone else. That's why I normally get walked all over, because on the odd occasion I do get angry, I'm told that I'm the one being unreasonable and everyone else is right.

I believe you have had helpful advice, albeit not what you wanted to hear. I would question why your solicitor didi not point it out to you earlier though.

MrsManda

I found similar information as above on another website as well so it does seem to be standard:

Alterations to Former Council Properties

If you own a former council property there may be restrictive covenants which are included in the transfer/sale of an ex-Council property to safeguard the interests of surrounding Council properties. You will need to apply in writing to the Housing Department prior to carrying out alterations and need written consent of the Council.

You may need to obtain the necessary Planning Permission/Building Regulations approval before the application can be considered. If the alteration is not covered by covenants, you do not require management permission.

http://www.nuneatonandbedworth.gov.uk/housing/council-housing/right-to-buy/right-to-buy-information

I'm not sure what you mean about moving your border wall?

rhubarb1

Hmm, common with ex-HA houses, but not as my solicitor would have me believe, with nearly every house bought in the UK. And as a first time buyer of an ex-HA I pay my solicitor to furnish me with that kind of info from the beginning, not wait until we are about to exchange.

Our border wall is worrying me because when the house was part-owned the tenant/owner was ordered to move his garden wall. The garden used to spread out at the front and round the side. It was moved back by about a metre at the front and the side garden wall was removed altogether. This was to allow them to widen the road as the HA had planned to develop land at the back of the house. The plans were never put in however and we hope to reclaim this land (it is ours marked in the Land Registry) and get our garden back. But if they retain control over what we do with the house, who's to say that they'd refuse us permission to move the garden wall back to where it used to be and that they'd actually go ahead with the road widening anyway?

ILW

rhubarb1 wrote: »

Hmm, common with ex-HA houses, but not as my solicitor would have me believe, with nearly every house bought in the UK. And as a first time buyer of an ex-HA I pay my solicitor to furnish me with that kind of info from the beginning, not wait until we are about to exchange.

Our border wall is worrying me because when the house was part-owned the tenant/owner was ordered to move his garden wall. The garden used to spread out at the front and round the side. It was moved back by about a metre at the front and the side garden wall was removed altogether. This was to allow them to widen the road as the HA had planned to develop land at the back of the house. The plans were never put in however and we hope to reclaim this land (it is ours marked in the Land Registry) and get our garden back. But if they retain control over what we do with the house, who's to say that they'd refuse us permission to move the garden wall back to where it used to be and that they'd actually go ahead with the road widening anyway?

I would walk away, with the possibilty of road widening etc. you could find the place impossible to sell.
Your solicitor does not seem to have kept you too well informed though.

MrsManda

rhubarb1 wrote: »

Hmm, common with ex-HA houses, but not as my solicitor would have me believe, with nearly every house bought in the UK. And as a first time buyer of an ex-HA I pay my solicitor to furnish me with that kind of info from the beginning, not wait until we are about to exchange.

There are not going to be similar restrictions on most houses sold in the UK because this restriction is purely due to the HA's responsibilities.
Similar restictions may be placed on non-ex HA properties for instance if a house is in a conservation area or graded by English Heritage.

Haven't a clue about the border wall issue.

rhubarb1

Yes that is the point I made to the solicitor but her exact words to me were; "if you buy an older property that is say, 50 years old, you will find that it is more than likely to have this kind of covenant on it" which is simply not true.

I have asked whether or not they could impose these restrictions on the garden wall and she said she "didn't think so". Pity I can't take her word for that.

Yes I think we may discuss walking away but that is such a hard thing to do when we've spent so much money, time and effort into securing it as a home for us all. I was so cautious in not telling the kids until I was certain it was ours and when I transferred the 10% of our deposit asked for, I began to really believe it was ours and we've discussed the colours of the walls for the kids rooms. They are so excited about being in a new home for the new year. It's just gutting.

So sorry if you all think me unreasonable, but I was purchasing this house with my heart as well as my head. It was our chance to break free from the shackles of renting as well as have a small investment for our retirement. Now all of that seems to be disappearing and yes, I am bloody well upset. Really really upset.

Richard_Webster

It is very common for builders to impose covenants on newly sold houses requiring their consent for alterations (although these don't usually cover internal laterations) and as others have said when LAs have disposed of their houses under the Right to Buy Scheme it is very common for them to impose covenants of a similar nature.

You will probably find that the covenants only repeat those in the shared ownership lease.

So my view would be that as far as the covenants are concerned if you bought a house on a nearby private estate you could well find the same sort of thing, so it is really no big deal.

I have checked the previous conveyancing report for 1988 and this clause about not making additions to the house was not in that.

Don't understand what you mean by "conveyancing report". Please explain.

tamarto

Sorry i think you got lost on the way to www.pleasegivemelotsofsympathyandhugz.co.uk

You posted on the House buying renting and selling board, if you wanted sympathy maybe you should have posted elsewhere, so sorry that you don't like what you have been told, perhaps we should tell you what you want to hear, after all it isn't us who live with the results.:j

Oh and i think you need a new solicitor.

rhubarb1

There was a conveyance report on the property dated Ist Aug 1988 which stipulated many of the restrictions placed on the property. The report states that the house at the time was 70% owned outright. It has all the features of the recent conveyancing report bar this clause. It does not mention at all additions to the exterior or interior of the property.

The exact wording of the conveyance which has been drafted for our purchase is this: "Not to make any alterations or additions to the exterior or the property or any alternations or additions to the interior of the property nor to erect any new buildings thereon nor in any way interfere with the outside of the property without the previous written consent of the Transferor any consent not to be unreasonably withheld."
Also:
"To execute and do at the expense of the Transferee all such works and things whatever as may at any time during the term be directed or required by any national or other public authority to be executed or done upon or in respect of the property or any part thereof"

This second para - does that mean that if the HA wanted to widen the road they could order us to retract our border? According to the Land Registry the land around the side, front and back of the property is ours, but whilst the house was part-owned the HA shaved a large chunk from the front and took away the side garden wall. We want to put it back as it was, but this second para implies they may be able to order us to retract it once again for highway purposes.

As an aside - solicitor just phoned to say that in asking her the above question I am asking above and beyond what she would normally do as a conveyancing solicitor.