Is an extension a 'structural alteration' or a 'building'?

rosie383

Relevant to a much earlier thread, we are in the process of buying an ex-council property and there is a restrictive covenant which says that we can't build at the rear of the property. After many many many phonecalls and emails, we have pretty much been told that they can't give us any answer if the covenant can be removed.
I have just been looking at the deeds again as we have to make a definite decision today if we are going to proceed with the purchase. Reading the restrictive clauses again I see that one clause states, ' not without first obtaining the written consent of the council to carry out any structural alterations to the property. ..'
Originally the clause that seemed to prevent us putting an extension states ' will not at any time hereafter erect or construct any building or buildings'.

So my question is... is an extension a building or a structural alteration? Every time I google structural alteration, I get loads of hits about building extensions. We are aware that we would have to get planning permission, but it seems that the wording may not, as we had originally feared, ban us from doing an extension at all.
Anyone able to clarify please?

Southend1

Ask your conveyancer for a definitive answer

rosie383

Been trying to ring them but no answer. Awaiting a phonecall.

Doozergirl

I would say that it is a structural alteration of sorts. Or more that I would say it is not a new building as it will be part of the existing.

These restrictive covenants tend to try and stop separate buildings popping up and subdivision of the plot.

rosie383

That's what I'm really hoping it means. I cant believe that we have maybe wasted a couple of weeks and lost sleep over this if an extension is in fact a structural alteration. I agree that the original aim of the covenant would have been to prevent someone building a new house on the land.

rosie383

Also trying to speak to the local council to see what their definition is. Awaiting a call back from them as well but not holding my breath.

G_M

Surely an extension is a structural alteration.

It is not a seperate building. There will still only be a single building post-work.

And since by definition it will involve breaking through the external wall (to create a new internal door to the extension), it is a structural alteration

rosie383

Thanks GM. And since the extension that we are planning falls within the parameters set which don't need planning permission, then hopefully all should be well.

davidmcn

Even if a covenant states it prohibits something, surely if it's for the benefit of the council they have power to consent to what would otherwise be a breach? Or is the problem that other parties would be able to object?

G_M

rosie383 wrote: »

Thanks GM. And since the extension that we are planning falls within the parameters set which don't need planning permission, then hopefully all should be well.

But please note I am not a surveyor! Or structural engineer, or....

just a Good Mate with no more idea than anyone else on the internet......

eddddy

Perhaps this is what you are doing anyway, but rather than asking the council to define the legal terms of their covenant, ask them the direct question:

"Given the covenant, do I need your written consent to build an extension, and if so, would you give it?"


- If they say "Yes" to your plan, everything is fine.
- If they say "No", but your solicitor thinks they should say "Yes" - you know that you will have a legal fight (with arguments about legal definitions of terms), which you may or may not win.
- If they say "No" and your solicitor says "No".... well...