Restrictive Covenant re extension

G_M

The council has given planning permission.

That involves a set of rules/procedures relating to planning law. Provided the proposed extension complied with the planning rules, planning permission must be granted (or can be appealed against).

The Consent under the covenant involves different criteria. The presence of the covenant would (well, should) not be taken into account when considering planning permission.

So it is perfectly feasible that the Planning Dept would grant planning permission, according to planning laws/requirements, but the Legal Dept, in considering the covenant, would (had they been asked) deny consent on the basis of criteria unrelated to planning law.

Furthermore, applications for PP can be made by anyone, not just the owner of land. The granting of PP does not automatically permit that person to build the extension - they also need ownership and other consents.

Undercovercarrot

ging84 wrote: »

Go apply for planning permission to demolish the building they work in, any other council owned building to turn it into a park

see what happens when you show up with bulldozers and try and claim you have permission because the council own it and the planning department approved it

Is that relevant? The land is not council owned - it has been transferred - it is freehold land owned by the vendor, i.e. me!

Doing some more reading on it, another argument is that the entire covenant could be discharged as:

"that by reason of changes in the character of the property or the neighbourhood, the restriction ought to be deemed obsolete"

My suggestion would be that the 60-80% of properties in the estate have had modifications to them (e.g. conservatories, extensions or new fences) rendering the original terms obsolete.

System

Planning permission only looks at whether the application meets the current regulations. They will not have sight of the deeds for the property as covenants are not part of the requirements for planning permission and as ging84 implies ownership of the property/land is not considered either.
Their remit is very narrow - Planning laws only

System

A restrictive covenant can be enforced by anybody that may be affected by it, so in theory the neighbour could object

G_M

!!!!!! wrote: »

A restrictive covenant can be enforced by anybody that may be affected by it, so in theory the neighbour could object

Only if the covenant includes "the neighbours" or "owners of xxxx" as benefitting from the covenant.