Restrictive covenants - penalties for breach?

*SuzySue*

Grateful for any advice on this.

My property is on an estate with a number of restrictive covenants which were provided to me when I purchased 7 or so years ago. I recently dug them out because I was thinking of putting a fence up between mine and my neighbour's front gardens (there are currently just some concrete slabs in an upright position). I'd also like to plant a short box hedge at the edge of my front lawn to keep
Passers by on the pavement and not my garden. These two things are expressly forbidden in the covenants.

However, many of my neighbours are clearly breaching others - by advertising their businesses in their front gardens, extending their driveways across their gardens, converting their garages, parking large works vehicles and caravans/motorhomes on their drives. To my knowledge the developers have never taken action against this.

Some other houses were built with walls and fences dividing their front gardens, so what I am proposing should not look out of place.

So before I splash out a few hundred Pounds on this, can anyone advise what the penalties could be for breaching the covenants?

tired_dad

Developers will usually stipulate a whole series of RC's on a development to stop things happening while they are still trying to sell units. For example they wont want you spoiling the frontage while they are taking around prospective buyers.

They also usually rapidly lose interest once the units are all sold.

I am not an expert. You would need to seek expert advice (which would not be cheap) if you really want to take it that far.

My understanding is the only person who can enforce a RC is the person/company who placed it. So if you break an RC, your neighbour cannot enforce it.

Its up to you but some people might take the disregard for RC's from the neighbours as a clue.

CashisKing

If you ask your neighbour and he's ok with it then just put up a fence and hedge and then the wort thing that will happen is you have to take it down, the cost of which is going to be less than the cost of getting legal advice and then insuring against the covenant being enforced

*SuzySue*

CashisKing wrote: »

If you ask your neighbour and he's ok with it then just put up a fence and hedge and then the wort thing that will happen is you have to take it down, the cost of which is going to be less than the cost of getting legal advice and then insuring against the covenant being enforced

I don't have a neighbour at the moment. Had issues with the previous owners cutting the corner across my garden. They've moved on and the house is up for sale. That's why I thought I'd put the fence up (on my side of the boundary), before new neighbours move in.

And the hedge would not be on the boundary with the neighbours (it's a barrier to people from the pavement) so I wouldn't ask about that.

I don't want to spend out £4-500 and have to remove them.

The estate is about 10 years old now, but the developer still maintains the road so perhaps they aren't bothered anymore.

Gurj247

I think generally (i could be wrong) that the RC's that builders put in place is for about 10 years, but from memory it usually always refers to the frontage of the property.
This was certainly the case on one of my fathers old properties and relatives.
As mentioned they are usually only put in place by the builder for the duration that they are on site so as to help sell the homes on site. A nice looking street certainly helps sell them.

iamcornholio

Covenants, can only be enforced by the person who benefits from them. Many properties have covenants, but they relate to a builder or other body long gone, or who would have no interest or possibility in enforcing the covenant.

The benefit of covenant on a new build estate could pass to the local council in some circumstances if they acquire title to land (eg the highways or grassed areas)

If the original builder has no intrest in the land (ie all the houss are sold) then the covenant to them could be unenforceable

If lots of walls and fences have already gone up, then it can be argued that that is the norm for that area now, and so the covenant becomes unenforceable by the council

John_Pierpoint

Before the Planning System was introduced, a lot of developers created "Estate Covenants" supposedly for the benefit of all the residents.
Ex Council estates often still have such covenants BUT still controlled by the local authority
If I lived on your estate, I would be encouraging a residents association to get hold of these rights.

If I was a fan of open front gardens and moved in to find someone had put up a big fence between the plots, then I would get upset. A row of low posts with a chain running between them could be acceptable.

On the other side of the coin, raising a transgression of a covenant, just when someone wants to sell, is a particularly good way of getting it observed - nobody wants to lie on the question about "Do you have a dispute?" worked a treat with a neighbour who never ever got round to cutting their hedge correctly at my mother's place.

Here is a posh example, where the owner of the country house, probably never realised that the covenants he imposed, when selling the grounds for development, could come back and bite.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/176671/Anger-ar-BA-union%27s-%A3100m-playhouse/

DVardysShadow

*SuzySue* wrote: »

.... I don't want to spend out £4-500 and have to remove them.

That in a nutshell is the consequences of breaching the covenant. There is no penalty as such..

John_Pierpoint

.........Unless you try to get clever on both sides and make solicitors very rich.

[Personally I think the owner of a restrictive covenant should be required to pay a modest fee every (say) 20 years to have it "renewed" at the Land Registry]

Land_Registry

Some interesting views being expressed here but it is important to recognise what a restrictive covenant is

A restrictive covenant is a promise by one person to another, (such as a buyer of land and a seller) not to do certain things with land/property. It binds the land and not an individual person and therefore "runs with the land". This means that the covenant continues even when the buyer sells the land on to another person.

Restrictive covenants continue to have effect even though they may have been made many years ago and appear to be obsolete.


Examples of restrictive covenants are:

• not to keep a caravan on the property
• not to run a business from the property
• not to keep any animals other than domestic pets on the property
• not to display advertisements, bills or placards on the property other than a notice that the land/property is to let or for sale.

Restrictive covenants usually occur when somebody selling land wishes to restrict what the purchaser can do with the land. The burden of the contract (in other words, the obligation to comply with the covenants) binds the land regardless of how often the land changes hands or how obsolete the covenants seem to be. It is this last part which is very important.

To use the example referred to by earlier posts a Developer will often include such restrictive covenants in each plot Transfer. However the benefit of the covenants then goes with the land and in effect each and every plot can then be both bound by and enjoy the benefit of those same covenants. The Developer will only retain the benefit themselves if they either expressly state this or they retain ownership of some of the land in the original development i.e. land which then in effect has the benefit of those covenants

Whilst this may appear odd it is important to recognise that such covenants are imposed for the benefit of neighbouring/adjoining land and as such are enforceable by the owners of that same land.

Such a practice has existed for many many years and if you look for example at developments from Victorian times you will see a range of covenants perhaps more relevant to the 'thinking' of their times varying from restricting the sale of intoxicating licquor to the keeping of livestock and the landowner not being able to use their house as an asylum.

As with most things to do with land law such matters are often only enforceable by taking the matter to court. Such an action would usually have to be brought by an owner of land with the benefit of the covevants.

As such we would always recommend that you should seek legal advice to assess a) will you breaking the covenant(s) by your actions b) who may enjoy the benefit of the covenant(s) and c) what level of risk is there that someone would seek to enforce same. Your legal adviser could then advise on next steps and whether to insure yourself against any posisble legal action.

The land register will provide details of any registered restrictive covenants. Advice on the legal complexities should therefore be sought form a solicitor familiar with conveyancing law. Land registry cannot, I'm afraid provide legal advice.

sunshinetours

Whilst I have no reason to doubt LRR post above, the probably more pertinent issue will be complying with any planning regs enforceabkle by local council that may be relevant to growing a hedge or puitting a fence near the road
You might also find growing a hedhe between the two front gardens both looks nicer and is less likely to cause any issues (just be careful what you plant and look after it)