Restrictive Covenants

cannyshopper_2

Just wondering here... how enforceable are they?

Background: housing estate (private houses) built late 1960's/early 1970's.

Was designed to be "Open plan" in that no-one was supposed to have any permanent structure (I understand this is usually taken to mean fence or wall) at the front of the property. This is written into my deeds.

I assume this was a condition of the original LA planning permission.

The houses were originally leasehold but most people bought the freehold when they could, some 30 years ago.

Most properties now have hedges of various heights from 2ft to 6ft along their frontage. Some have wrought iron railings, quite a few now have lowish brick walls. Very, very few have gates across their drives.

SO if I built a wall at the front of my property, and put in gates to my driveway, what would be the position if my neighbour wanted to object?

G_M

Assuming your neighbour was a party to the covenant (ie his property beneftted from it) then yes he could object, and ultimately go to court to enforce the covenant.

cannyshopper_2

(1) Can I argue precedent, in that no-one has (apparently) objected to others doing what I want to do?
(2) would he have to show it caused him some sort of loss of benefit? There is a hedge running down the side of his driveway so he wouldn't be able to see most of the wall at all.

ETA: The house directly opposite his, has exactly what I'd like to do. Its got a brick wall approx. 2 ft 6 with a wrought iron railing on top, to bring the total height to about 5ft or so. I'd add a pair of wrought iron gates to match.

bertiewhite

Talk to your neighbour. Like G_M says, nobody will enforce a restrictive covenant unless they have reason to (eg. inconvenience) so if there are other walls, hedges etc then discuss it and point out the fact. Have they broken any covenants by building a wall or planting a hedge? Do you get on with them?

Guest101

cannyshopper wrote: »

(1) Can I argue precedent, in that no-one has (apparently) objected to others doing what I want to do? - not really.
(2) would he have to show it caused him some sort of loss of benefit? There is a hedge running down the side of his driveway so he wouldn't be able to see most of the wall at all. - no.

ETA: The house directly opposite his, has exactly what I'd like to do. Its got a brick wall approx. 2 ft 6 with a wrought iron railing on top, to bring the total height to about 5ft or so. I'd add a pair of wrought iron gates to match.

Why not just ask him?

austonic

I recently bought a house, and had a chat on this very topic with my solicitor (who specialised in property law and conveyancing - I'd engaged her because the property we sold was a complex sale with lots of intricate rights). I was a little surprised by some of the covenants on the new property (a pretty standard four bed detached house in a small housing estate, built in the early 90s) such as one not allowing us to breed rabbits!

Her comment (paraphrased from my poor memory) was that many of these covenants make her laugh as they simply have no chance of being enforced. She said there had to be an almost overwhelming case to restrict a home owners rights to do with their home and land as they wished what they would otherwise normally be allowed to do in compliance with various laws on such things. Moreover, often the people who had originally had the covenant added were no longer around, or no longer cared even if they were (not least because of some liberties they may well have taken over the years - opening cans of worms comes to mind), and typically the neighbours had also changed plus had little knowledge or visibility of any such restrictions on neighbouring properties. She added that it would take some expense and effort on the part of a neighbour to try to enforce covenants unless it was very clear and obvious that their own freedoms were being deeply impacted in an unreasonable manner by the covenant being broken (and even then, they would have to spend money and time on getting this to court/arbitration if a simple agreement could not be reached).

We spoke in addition about some elements of the paperwork for the house I was selling which had certain rights of access over land to the rear and to a small part of a private access road (without the use of which we would not have been able to have used our own large driveway). She said such rights were obviously necessary and easily evidenced and whilst she had come across arguments in her time of small strips of land owned by different people that made access to driveways difficult, in her experience this was always following major changes such large extensions and significant re-routing of utilities/driveways or similarly when part of the land had been sold off for a new build.

* UPDATE * - just remembered she did say there was an exception when some kind of regular (often small, peppercorn) payment or action was involved which established a practice.

NB. IANAL! (I am not a lawyer - just my recall of what was said.)

cannyshopper_2

As I understand it, if the property was leasehold, then the leaseholder could object.

So what in general happens to the covenants when a leasehold property becomes freehold?

cannyshopper_2

Austonic

Some of my covenants relate to (eg) not keeping livestock - cattle sheep and pigs are specifically mentioned, and also I think chickens, but not rabbits. I think the LA (and the neighbours!) might have something to say if I got a goat to keep the garden in order.

There are also covenants about running a business (that specifically names motor vehicle repairs & a few others) but apparently I am allowed to use my address as a registered office. Again, I think local planning regulations would cover most of this.

austonic

I think LA's don't worry about homes used as registered offices unless either you start getting huge deliveries (e.g. artic load of post on a daily basis) or a lot of customers/clients visiting, both of which are clearly inconsistent with residential use. Administrative/Clerical use not generally an issue. (Your mortgage & insurance companies might take a different view.)

Shame about the goat.

Guest101

Covenants are put in place by developers to ensure that, when it comes to selling phase 2 or 3, people aren't seeing a load of white vans, houses not in sync etc.


I suspect no-one will care

sparky130a

cannyshopper wrote: »

As I understand it, if the property was leasehold, then the leaseholder could object.

So what in general happens to the covenants when a leasehold property becomes freehold?

Jack.

These covenants are never chased.