Restrictive convanent-hut?=summer house

gemma.zhang

I have a plan. Will build summer house anyway, in case of being sued, I may as well destroy it, which might be cheaper than paying for that insurance and going through the trouble, and would have enjoyed it for years anyway besides, the chance of that happening is slim!

What do u guys think?

phoebe1989seb

When was the house built OP?

We bought a house in 2007 that was erected on its current site in the 1930s (although it was actually a Tudor house that had been carefully dismantled and moved from another site) and had had a conservatory added in the 1990s.

When we sold last year our buyers' solicitor discovered a restrctive covenant that said no caravans, garden buildings or conservatories could be erected in the garden. This dated from when the original owner of the plot sold it to the guy that erected the house in the 1930s.

Virtually every other house on the estate had a conservatory, garden building or caravan (or all three!) on their land and all the properties had originally been owned by the same guy who laid out the estate so all would have been subject to the same restrictive covenant. Our solicitor hadn't picked this up when we bought only three years previously and as far as I'm aware nor had anyone else when the house had been sold in 2003 and 1999.

The solicitor recommended indemnity insurance, which as far as I can remember was only around £100-200 - definitely worth it for peace of mind, although in our case the originator of the restrictive covenant would have passed away years ago.

In your case if you intend to stay there some considerable time I would be inclined to go ahead and build the summerhouse then take it down when/if you sell as you suggest........

Ivana_Tinkle

You need to investigate further. The worst-case scenario isn't being forced to take it down, it's a falling-out with your neighbours which makes day-to-day life unbearable and which becomes a dispute you have to declare when selling!

There's a massive difference between a summerhouse and a shed. For a start, people don't (usually!) have parties or (usually!) make much noise a shed. We lived in a house where we were explicitly forbidden to build a summerhouse or garden office, because it would potentially disturb neighbours, but sheds were fine.

jjlandlord

gemma.zhang wrote: »

I have a plan. Will build summer house anyway, in case of being sued, I may as well destroy it, which might be cheaper than paying for that insurance and going through the trouble

As you said that insurance was about £900, I reckon that by "summer house" you mean "nicer looking shed" for it to be that cheap.
Although sheds could probably considered 'huts', if the house is old (other party of the deed long gone) and all neighbours already have sheds, there should be no problem. Especially, as you said, considering the price.

phoebe1989seb

Ivana_Tinkle wrote: »

There's a massive difference between a summerhouse and a shed. For a start, people don't (usually!) have parties or (usually!) make much noise a shed. We lived in a house where we were explicitly forbidden to build a summerhouse or garden office, because it would potentially disturb neighbours, but sheds were fine.

Some do though We have friends that have two 'sheds' in their garden......one is used for housing the usual stuff - garden tools etc, whilst the other houses a drum kit and is kitted out as a blokes' den complete with armchairs These are both standard sheds, not summerhouses, the larger of the two being a 10' x 8'. Both are positioned at the end of a longish (60'?) but quite narrow (25'?) garden at the rear of their terraced house. They don't have parties in the shed, but a fair amount of noise is generated when our friend practices his drumming skills They are on very good terms with all their neighbours, none of whom have ever complained about the noise......

Definitely agree that for £900 you must be thinking of a better looking shed type structure as most of the summerhouses we've looked at have starting prices from a few thousand. Also log cabins can be quite *shed-like* in appearance, so imho there is quite a grey area surrounding when is a shed not a shed, but a summerhouse and as for a *hut* - wikipedia defines 'hut' as a 'small & crude shelter', which covers a multitude of things but not necessarily a smart summerhouse, lol!

gemma.zhang

phoebe1989seb wrote: »

When was the house built OP?

We bought a house in 2007 that was erected on its current site in the 1930s (although it was actually a Tudor house that had been carefully dismantled and moved from another site) and had had a conservatory added in the 1990s.

When we sold last year our buyers' solicitor discovered a restrctive covenant that said no caravans, garden buildings or conservatories could be erected in the garden. This dated from when the original owner of the plot sold it to the guy that erected the house in the 1930s.

Virtually every other house on the estate had a conservatory, garden building or caravan (or all three!) on their land and all the properties had originally been owned by the same guy who laid out the estate so all would have been subject to the same restrictive covenant. Our solicitor hadn't picked this up when we bought only three years previously and as far as I'm aware nor had anyone else when the house had been sold in 2003 and 1999.

The solicitor recommended indemnity insurance, which as far as I can remember was only around £100-200 - definitely worth it for peace of mind, although in our case the originator of the restrictive covenant would have passed away years ago.

In your case if you intend to stay there some considerable time I would be inclined to go ahead and build the summerhouse then take it down when/if you sell as you suggest........

The house was built in 1900, on the title deeds, the convenient was added in 1990. Not sure how the time here helps?

Wondering why it was added in 1990, maybe the land was bought at that time?
If the insurance was 100-200, I definitely take it, but not at close to 900 range!

Richard_Webster

If you try to get insurance before you put the summerhouse up then it could be more like £900 because the insurance company don't know what will happen. However the policies become radically cheaper once the work is 12 months old and nobody has complained because the chances of anyone trying to enforce the covenants are then much reduced and a typical indemnity policy might then cost £100-£200.

If the covenant goes back to 1900 and you have good relations with your neighbours then it may well be worth the risk. When you sell if ti has not been there 20 years then you can offer your buyers a policy.

gemma.zhang

Richard_Webster wrote: »

If you try to get insurance before you put the summerhouse up then it could be more like £900 because the insurance company don't know what will happen. However the policies become radically cheaper once the work is 12 months old and nobody has complained because the chances of anyone trying to enforce the covenants are then much reduced and a typical indemnity policy might then cost £100-£200.

If the covenant goes back to 1900 and you have good relations with your neighbours then it may well be worth the risk. When you sell if ti has not been there 20 years then you can offer your buyers a policy.

What will happe if we get complaints from neighbor? Want to know the steps/worst case scenario...Remove it? Will that solve everything? Or other financial lost/court sue?
The house was built back in 1900, however the convenient is only back to 1990, 20 yrs ago, is it worth taking the risk?

Lifes_Grand_Plan

OP, who is the covanantee?

gemma.zhang

Lifes_Grand_Plan wrote: »

OP, who is the covanantee?

There was name on the deed, might be previous owners..