trying to buy a house... again

Strapped

You can always go for exchange and completion on the same day if you're that worried - less time for mortgage company to back out! Although doing that brings its own set of issues.

bobwilson

Thrugelmir wrote: »

There's no point in worrying about things that you are unable to control. As that's life.

But this is a contract. You shouldn't be expected to sign a contract that knowingly makes you responsible for something that you can't control.

art_for_arts_sake

Regarding the power line, would you rather have one under your garden or above your garden? There's more chance of the cable being damaged by winds and the visual aspect though I suppose there's also the chance a contractor could also slice through it underground. I'd take the original developers' covenant on the property with a pinch of salt particularly if some time has passed as they are unlikely to take any interest. Check the companies' register, Fairbriar Homes might not even exist anymore.

scottishblondie

It sounds like you have too many concerns to proceed with this purchase TBH. You can find another property without the covenants, but your problem with signing the contract is always going to exist if you need a mortgage!

Lavendyr

bobwilson wrote: »

Our solicitor has said if our lender pulls out between exchange and completion (which they can do for no reason other than they feel like it), we'll be liable to pay the seller £33,000.

Yep - it's (really fairly) unlikely, in most cases, as the mortgage lender will have issued you a formal offer, but it's not impossible. If you fail to complete on the date agreed at exchange for any reason - including losing the mortgage - you could lose your deposit and be liable for the sellers' costs incurred.

Most people take around a week between exchange and completion - our lender required that much time to ensure that they could guarantee the funds for drawdown.

It's not the kind of thing I'd worry substantially about, though - it's very much the exception where this kind of thing could happen, and I wouldn't let this stop me from buying a house. It will be the same with any house where you are involving a mortgage lender, so if you want to buy a house without putting the full cash amount forward yourself, it's a risk you will have to take.

bobwilson wrote: »

At the same time, our seller has suddenly announced that there are covenants on the property: a public electricity line under the garden (going all along the length of the plot), that is owned by South Eastern Electric Company. South Eastern Electric Company have the right to enter the garden, and dig it all up to do repairs or maintenance to the underground electric line, or inspect as they choose.

This seems far less usual to me! Most houses have some restrictive covenants (we aren't allowed to keep livestock or live in a caravan on our driveway, for instance!), but that would be a bit of a dealbreaker for me I'm afraid. I'd probably look elsewhere.

bobwilson wrote: »

In addition to this, apparently, before we can make any changes to the house or garden, we have to ask permission from a company called ''Fairbriar Homes Ltd", and they can charge a fee.:rotfl:

This is more usual, as Fairbriar Homes sound like they were the developer. Often the developer will retain some rights over their development, but in many cases the rights either expire after a fixed period of time (say, 10 years after the development was completed). Do read the covenant yourselves to be certain, and also it's worth looking around the street itself, or on the local council's planning site to see if many houses in that area have had work done. If it's important to you to be able to extend etc, you need to be clear that this covenant won't prevent you from doing so.

bobwilson wrote: »

Since this house is freehold and was built privately by the previous owner, we can't fathom why Fairbriar homes have a say on anything.

The restrictive covenant will originally have been put in there to preserve the look and feel of the area that was originally intended by the developer. They often do have a time limit though, as I said above. If not, as others have said, they may not even exist any longer and therefore there is no one whose permission you would need to ask.

bobwilson wrote: »

These things take away the whole point in owning our own house, for us.

Restrictive covenants are fairly commonplace and are usually in place for the reason above.

bobwilson wrote: »

Our solicitor said they find these covenants to be "acceptable". Well we don't.

Then pull out - that's your only option, and try to find somewhere with fewer restrictive covenants. Older houses may be better as their covenants may be more likely to have lapsed or the developers no longer in business, but I think a lot of houses do have restrictive covenants which are there to protect the look of the area.

bobwilson

Thanks for the reply, that's really helpful. Interesting that it'd be a dealbreaker for you.

I think this is one of the most important things to us - whether or not we could sell the property in the future.



We realise you may be wondering why we're pushing this. We're not going to debunk on the purchase unless absolutely necessary, as we love the house and there's nothing else on the market we like (hasnt been for a year). That equally doesn't mean we're going to buy a house that will be impossible to sell.



The house was only built in 1980s. The land was originally part of next door neighbours gardens, so there are 2 land registry titles. Is this usual?

:cool:

Our solicitor is slow, doesn't seem to be doing what we ask, doesn't seem to care and isn't offering much in the way of an opinion on anything.. ! They keep blaming the sellers' solicitor for being slow, but when we ask what exactly they've been doing for the past week, it turns out they haven't done anything and haven't even contacted the parties in the covenants at all... (which they promised to do a week ago) we're on the verge of doing our own research! :rotfl:

I've tried to attach a clip of the covenant, but we were only given it as a scan (not text), so typing it out would take too long. If I work out a way to do it, I'll post back here with the actual covenant.

So, basically, the electric wires go from a service station behind the garden (which we didn't even know was there as the garden is surrounded by tall shrubs and trees), all the way down the garden through past the house, to the street.

The covenant says we can't build or plant trees on or within 1.5 metres either side of where the electric wires are underground. The garden is 12.8 metres at the bottom, and about 4 metres at the top (a triangle), so this means we can't plant trees, or build or extend on a large part of the garden and a large part near the house (if ever we should want to). With this covenant in place there basically isn't any realistic space to extend.



We need to know that we can sell the house in future, so the main thing is marketability. What does everyone else here think of this covenant; how would it affect the house's future marketability? Would you be ok with this covenant, or would you pass?

bobwilson

Lavendyr wrote: »

This is more usual, as Fairbriar Homes sound like they were the developer. Often the developer will retain some rights over their development, but in many cases the rights either expire after a fixed period of time (say, 10 years after the development was completed).

The restrictive covenant will originally have been put in there to preserve the look and feel of the area that was originally intended by the developer.

Fairbriars may have developed the estate, but they had nothing to do with the development of this house. The house is in an estate, but in a completely different style to those in the estate, as it was built privately by the owner. The land was bought from 2 neighbours' gardens in the 1980s, the land was sold, and a couple built a house on it. They have now passed away, hence why it's for sale.

It's in a completely different style to the rest of the estate, in fact the building materials didn't even come from the UK, it was built entirely privately...

The covenant says, we need to get Fairbriars Ltd. permission to do anything to the property, for the next 80 years (since 1983), and may have to pay them a fee (at their discretion).

thegirlintheattic

bobwilson wrote: »

sigh.

wrong. See above post.

If you don't like the terms of the contract don't sign. You are probably going to find similar terms in most contracts when buying a house using a mortgage. Seems your only solution is paying up front.

geoffky

Bob,I would get the two titles converted into one if i was you...

Lavendyr

bobwilson wrote: »

Fairbriars may have developed the estate, but they had nothing to do with the development of this house. <snip> The covenant says, we need to get Fairbriars Ltd. permission to do anything to the property, for the next 80 years (since 1983), and may have to pay them a fee (at their discretion).

I suspect perhaps that this was what the couple building the house originally had to sign up to when buying the land and building on it then? But I agree that this sounds a bit weird!

80 years is also pretty steep IMHO. Our house has a covenant saying that we have to ask the developer for permission (and pay a fee) for any work to be done for 20 years following the development (which has passed).