Restrictive covenants

sm82

I'm in the middle of moving house, and working through the enquiries submitted by the buyer, one of which is to confirm that the restrictive covenants present in the lease have not been breached. As a collective, we bought out the freehold on our block of flats several years ago, but the lease terms are still in force. Nothing has been breached, with the exception of one minor point

" at all times to ensure fitted carpets or carpet tiles are laid in all rooms of the flat and to hang curtains in all windows of the flat"

The bathroom had a tiled floor when I moved in, and I tiled the kitchen floor when I refitted that and I've taken down one set of curtains as they were in quite a bad state (rail is still there).

Now according to the terms of the lease, these would be a breach, but how likely is the point to be enforced? (I'm assuming it won't be at all, but thought I would get the MSE opinion!)

da_rule

Are you selling your share in the freehold too?

I would declare it but it seems like a very minor breach, and as you are one of the freeholders you would be unlikely to enforce it against yourself?

eddddy

sm82 wrote: »

Now according to the terms of the lease, these would be a breach, but how likely is the point to be enforced? (I'm assuming it won't be at all, but thought I would get the MSE opinion!)

Assuming you have a 'fairly typical' lease...

Enforcement would probably be triggered if another leaseholder complained to the joint freeholders.



e.g. If the leaseholder downstairs complained because of the noise of footsteps on the tiled floor.

Or another leaseholder complained that the block looked untidy because of the missing curtains.

(And of course, sometimes leaseholders complain about these things out of spite etc.)

sm82

yes I'm selling my freehold share as well. I would serious doubt another leaseholder would complain, as we "collectively" are all the freeholders, so we'd be enforcing it against ourselves. (plus I know of some other flats with laminate down, which would also constitute a breach!)

boliston

i have heard about carpeting rules in leases but curtains seems odd! surely during the day curtains would be open anyway so not visible and when dark it would not be possible to see there are no curtains.

AlexMac

I think you're getting worried about a non-issue. These lease conditions are common to every flat I've ever owned, and are widely ignored anyway. In fact, I've never referred to them as "covenants", which I would regard as something imposed by a freeholder or the previous landowner to prevent real abusive practices (e.g. no horse-slaughtering or knackers businesses, open-cast mining or bordellos....).

Google it: " Restrictive covenants, once agreed between the parties, are placed in the title deeds to the property...." I bet your "deeds" (or their virtual equivalent at the land registry don't say 'owt 'bout rugs!

So I'd play dumb and just say no. After all, when you move out you often take rugs and curtains with you and if there had been a breach which worried you as part freeholder you would have taken action against yourself as leaseholder- maybe even to the level of "determining" your lease (i.e. evicting yourself....) ..

You get my point? Don't even share your misinterpretation of the question with your solicitor. S/He'll only get 4rsey and add 50 quid to your bill!
Happy New Year

G_M

It's irrelevant who owns the freehold. The lease still applies.

As edddy says, if one leaseholder complained, the 'freeholder' could enforce. If there are, say, 20 flats in the block, then the OP would have 1 vote in 20 - the other 19 might decide the leaseholder beneath should be protected from the noise the OP makes.

However yes, it's unlikely, and it's a minor breach.

Since the buyer has asked, you have 3 options

1) lie and say 'None'.
2) tell the truth, and highlight the 2 covenants that have been breached. I can't see the buyer withdrawing over such an insignificant matter.
3) pass the onus back to the buyer by saying "Buyer should rel on his own inspections." - which is likely to ring alarm bells.

da_rule

If the seller lies and says none then this would be a blatant misrepresentation and could give rise to future claims. You're better off just telling the truth.

Also, how many of you are there that own the freehold? You could all agree to remove the covenant from all of the leases, which would benefit all of the titles.

societys_child

Just to add another option to G_Ms post.

4) B&m/ Wilkos/ any diy shed. Buy a couple of boxes of cheap carpet tiles, pair of cheap curtains, an hours work and you can answer, No . . .

eddddy

G_M wrote: »

As edddy says, if one leaseholder complained, the 'freeholder' could enforce. If there are, say, 20 flats in the block, then the OP would have 1 vote in 20 - the other 19 might decide the leaseholder beneath should be protected from the noise the OP makes.

If it's a 'typical' lease... this can't be decided on the basis of votes.


1) Every leaseholder in the block will covenant with the freeholder to lay carpets.

2) The freeholder will covenant with each leaseholder to enforce covenants on the other leaseholders.


So... if one leaseholder asks the freeholder (or joint freeholders) to enforce the 'carpet' covenant on another leaseholder - they must do so.

(If the complaining leaseholder is sufficiently bloody-minded, they could get a court order forcing the freeholders to enforce the covenant.)