How are restrictive covenants enforced and by whom?

worried_jim

Photocopy the covenant page, highlight the relevant paragraph, then post it to all the houses to see if there is any improvement/reaction. You could hand deliver, but I would stump up the cost and pay for postage then you can hide behind some anonymity. Good luck!

PasturesNew

The trouble with covenants is that only the person who is really peeved about it would have the drive/cash to enforce it.

While a trade van is annoying, whether it annoys you enough or not depends where it is. If it's round the corner you're going to be annoyed - if it's your direct neighbour's van and it's parked in their drive preventing you getting any view/sun then you're going to be more motivated to pay a solicitor to send them a letter. A van, too, is likely to not be there half the time.

So, in short, where would your caravan be parked? Who would it upset/over shadow? If you can look at the space where it'd go and GENUINELY see that nobody else would be impacted by it sitting there 24/7 for months on end .... then give it a go.

But, if it's right against your living room window, meaning it's the ONLY thing your adjoining neighbour can see when they look out of their window .... then expect the doorbell to go pretty quickly.

Covenants are enforceable, but only by those who have been adversely and directly and perpetually affected by somebody breaking one.

Only ever break a covenant because "you have the money to immediately rectify it" if you're picked up on it. In your case, you know where you'd stick your caravan if there were a legal letter that turned up....

chunkytfg

So has the answer about who would actually enforce it been answered?

I'm buying a house that has a RC that says I must have a tree or shrub in the front garden. It's a 1940's house so not a new build estate.

Would it be likely that all the neighbours will have the same RC? Most of them have turned there whole front garden into parking with no tree or shrub.

DCFC79

chunkytfg wrote: »

So has the answer about who would actually enforce it been answered?

I'm buying a house that has a RC that says I must have a tree or shrub in the front garden. It's a 1940's house so not a new build estate.

Would it be likely that all the neighbours will have the same RC? Most of them have turned there whole front garden into parking with no tree or shrub.

Can't provide any advice except to say why don't you go with the flow.


Whats the worst that could happen, they ask for a tree or shrub to be outside.

xylophone

http://www.hip-consultant.co.uk/blog/enforcing-covenants-123/
may be worth a look.

chunkytfg

DCFC79 wrote: »

Can't provide any advice except to say why don't you go with the flow.


Whats the worst that could happen, they ask for a tree or shrub to be outside.

That was my thinking tbh and the garden just happens to have a pile of left over driveway bricks that match and should be enough to fill in the hole where the plant currently is:T:rotfl:

SmashedAvacado

The owner of the benefiting land can enforce it. Find the covenant. Find which parcel of land benefits

Sachs

chunkytfg wrote: »

So has the answer about who would actually enforce it been answered?

I'm buying a house that has a RC that says I must have a tree or shrub in the front garden. It's a 1940's house so not a new build estate.

Would it be likely that all the neighbours will have the same RC? Most of them have turned there whole front garden into parking with no tree or shrub.

That's a Positive covenant, not a restrictive covenant and is unenforceable.

And the answer to who can enforce is generally the owner of the land that has the benefit of the covenant.

chunkytfg

Sachs wrote: »

That's a Positive covenant, not a restrictive covenant and is unenforceable.

And the answer to who can enforce is generally the owner of the land that has the benefit of the covenant.

Even better :beer::beer:

Badger51

I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure that everyone on an estate does not have equal reciprocal enforcement rights. It's much more complicated (and nonsensical).The right of one property on a housing estate to enforce a restrictive covenant against another house on the estate depends on it being a dominant tenement and the other a servient tenement. That depends on the order in which they were sold off from the developer's original parcel of land. The first house sold won't have any rights to enforce against houses sold later, it will be servient to them all. The last house to be sold will inherit all the rights of the developer over all the ones sold earlier and be dominant over all and servient to none. Houses sold in between will have rights over houses sold earlier, which are servient, but not over houses sold later, which are dominant. I doubt if it would be practical to try to unravel who can enforce against who on a large estate. The developer can only enforce if he still owns part of the original parcel of land