Question re covenant from 1965 re wireless transmitter

Wolfsbane2k

Hi.

The house we are looking to buy has a couple of covenant on it, one of which has me a bit befuddled.

Specifically, it states:

Not to install, affix, or place any wireless transmitting aerial or set on the land being sold.....

To me, given its age, is designed to restrain the use of cb radios, however a wireless router for internet could fall under this covenant.

Has anyone got history/ experience if this covenant being used against such items?

Thanks.

W

Paul_the_Painter

2 things
1 "on the land" guessing you would put your router INSIDE the house
2 assuming 1 to be the case, how would anyone ever find out?

Probably unenforceable anyway

jjlandlord

If you go that way, you should also leave your mobile phone at the land's boundary...

I would suspect that this is aimed at large aerials e.g. CB ones as you mention.

Unless the property is in a sensitive area (e.g. nearby military, or telecoms infrastructures), which could explain the covenant, I think there should not be much issues in practice.

G_M

Paul_the_Painter wrote: »

2 things
1 "on the land" guessing you would put your router INSIDE the house
2 assuming 1 to be the case, how would anyone ever find out?

Probably unenforceable anyway

1) in legal terms, the 'house' (both inside and out) is part of the 'Land'.
2) agreed

Who is the Beneficiary of this covenant. Or if they are deceased, sold
up, bankrupt etc, who has inherited/become the current Beneficiary?

Assuming they found out, would they be likely to enforce?

I agree this covenant was agreed prior to current wireles technologies, and was doubtless imposed for reasons that are now irrelevant (hence my Qs above)

Wolfsbane2k

G_M wrote: »

1) in legal terms, the 'house' (both inside and out) is part of the 'Land'.
2) agreed

Who is the Beneficiary of this covenant. Or if they are deceased, sold
up, bankrupt etc, who has inherited/become the current Beneficiary?

Assuming they found out, would they be likely to enforce?

I agree this covenant was agreed prior to current wireles technologies, and was doubtless imposed for reasons that are now irrelevant (hence my Qs above)

It's not close to military site or anything similar, but think it's an entire "keep the estate looking the same, not break site lines" type thing.

It looks like the company that dictated the covenants still exists, according to company house anyway, so assuming that they are the beneficary?

I have no idea about likely to enforce, there are a few covenants on the property such as no caravans and one on no sheds that has been broken as it has three sheds on it...

My conveyancer is looking at them, but I wanted some less legal feedback.

agrinnall

Highly unlikely to have had anything to do with CB radio given that its use in the UK was illegal until 1981. Far more likely to be aimed at 'ham' radio operation in 1965.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_band_radio#United_Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio

Davesnave

CB radio in 1965?

Most of us thought a car radio that picked up Luxmbourg was pretty cool in those days! :rotfl:

It was aimed at curbing the huge metallic erections of middle-aged men, who spent hours with their headphones on, discussing the weather and the price of fish with similar people on the other side of the globe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg03Dm4y1ao

Somewhat reminiscent of another invention which came to popularity in the closing years of the 20th century......;)

Land_Registry

Wolfsbane2k wrote: »

It looks like the company that dictated the covenants still exists, according to company house anyway, so assuming that they are the beneficary?

I have no idea about likely to enforce, there are a few covenants on the property such as no caravans and one on no sheds that has been broken as it has three sheds on it...

My conveyancer is looking at them, but I wanted some less legal feedback.

Developers will often impose a set of covenants on each plot/house sale which are often designed to keep the development in check whilst they sell off the plots/houses - the theory being that by keeping the development looking 'as new' aids sales I guess.

The benefit of such covenants runs with the land, namely the development as a whole so as each plot/house is sold the benefit is split so that over time each plot/house owner is likely to have the benefit. The original developer may retain some benefit if they still own parts of the original development.

Your solicitor will I am sure be aware of this and in my experience the main issue people consider is what is the likely risk of someone seeking to enforce the covenants who also has the benefit. The fact that neighbours have broken other covenants can help when considering the level of risk I suspect.

Other posters on MSE will have more knowledge of such matters as to actual examples but your solicitor should be able to advise on the legal aspects and assist you in deciding next steps.

As far as the actual covenant is concerned it is not one of the more common ones I have seen over the years used on developments but jjlandlord's view seems to me to be a fair one in the circumstances.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

agrinnall wrote: »

Highly unlikely to have had anything to do with CB radio given that its use in the UK was illegal until 1981. Far more likely to be aimed at 'ham' radio operation in 1965.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_band_radio#United_Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio

Yes, this.

Amateur radio operators then, and still today, often used very large aerials. You can still see local HAM radio clubs occasionally at village fairs and such like, putting up a 10 metre aerial tower with guy lines to hold it in place and talking to people around the world.

societys_child

1965? Probably to stop Russian spies calling the mother country:rotfl:

Wolfsbane2k

Thanks for all the feedback, most appreciated.
My solicitor has verbally said "ignore it re mobile phones and wifi spots", but seems unwilling to put this in writing for some reason!