Restrictive Covenants

NeilCr

I realise it's a house not a flat. I was just using our case as an example. We have a mix of flats and houses on our estate which makes it a bit interesting at times!

I'd still look at a dish on a pole fixed to the back of the house. Sky wouldn't put mine up but I had no trouble getting a local contractor to do it

I honestly think you'll struggle to get the "general" covenants removed or changed. As I say I do agree about 3 and 4 require far more information

Chanes

If the best hardwired internet you can get is 2Mb that on its own would put people off! The pet covenant is really low...does it include goldfish and budgies (?) Satellite dishes not being allowed on the front of properties is really common for a covenant. Being a member of the estate management doesn't seem like a bad thing? The bill for communal services sounds like a share of costs for a collapsed drain or such? Which has to be paid for somehow if it isn't covered by the utilities or council, surely?

Based on the internet speed and the nebulous nature of the JK eradication I would be thinking a lot if this was right and I wouldn't buy it. But I ain't you and if you love it maybe these things are a price worth paying?

Haylescom

Only speaking from personal experience here, when we bought our property a year ago we had a similar covenant about satellite dishes (none to be added to the property until they had completed sale of the last one on site). We arranged for a freeview aerial to be installed in the loft.
Low and behold, a family moved into the house right next door to the show house and had a dish installed smack bang on the front of their property the day after they got there. We discussed it with the site manager and, whilst he couldn't categorically say thee would be no comeback, he said it had never caused an issue on any sites he'd managed previously. We now have our own dish but it's quite tucked away, above my neighbour's car port.
With regard to the last 2 we didn't have anything similar; we too have a management company (as most new builds seem to hold you to ransom to now), but the company and annual fee had already been set out.

Haylescom

Oh and regarding Internet, ours is 1.8! The exchange is too crowded, there's no fibre and BT Openreach took 8 months to do the work they needed to.

AnotherJoe

If that's the exact wording of the "pet clause" then you could be liable (though does the covenant say what the penalties are?) if you had a tank of tropical fish or a fish pond in your garden or your two hamsters did what comes naturally, you'd have the covenant police round.

I'm not impressed with the argument from some that no one will care if you break some rule such asa shed in garden nor by what frankly sounds likes snobby "no satellite dish on from of house being a good thing" posts, though if your house is detached but you could always put it on a bracket on side of house front facing and stick to the letter of the law. But point is, if it's OK to put a shed up breaking a covenant why not a satellite dish or a shark through your roof.

And while I'm on a rant, how come it's OK for someone with a van to install your boiler or fix your electrics but you certainly don't want her living next door to you ?

I couldn't be doing with all this and would be looking elsewhere.

davidmcn

This sort of stuff, give or take the odd clause, is pretty much universal for any new build (or under say 20 year old) development, so I wouldn't worry about future marketability. Don't expect the developer to negotiate clauses individually with each owner, or any other builder to have a more lax set of rules. But as has already been said, they don't tend to be enforced unless you're really causing a nuisance.

Thrugelmir

Haylescom wrote: »

Only speaking from personal experience here, when we bought our property a year ago we had a similar covenant about satellite dishes (none to be added to the property until they had completed sale of the last one on site). We arranged for a freeview aerial to be installed in the loft.
.

I had that restriction over 20 years ago. Along with no sheds. No caravans to be parked on drives. No changes to the front elevation of the property.Along with many other minor issues.

The developer simply wants to sell the properties they are building. So wants the development to look "presentable" to potential buyers.

Once completed no one cares 2 hoots.

Hedgehog99

Sometimes info can arrive from solicitors in dribs and drabs. I was sent management company forms to sign, but with no explanatory info. They only needed to be signed at the last minute, so I waited and, sure enough, a later document explained all the Ts & Cs of the MC.