Removing a charge on property

Noopy66

Hi, we have lived in our home for over 40 years and mortgage free now, however when I checked my land registry documents with HM Land Registry there is a charge against my property which has probably been there all the time, I have never researched this info before.
The registry quotes:-
A Conveyance dated 20 December 1889 made between (1) Henry John Royds
and Edwards Comerford Hawkins and (2) The Suburban Property Company
Limited contains restrictive covenants but neither the original deed
nor a certified copy or examined abstract thereof was produced on first
registration.

I have searched for the company shown and they are dissolved status, the house was built around 1900 so not sure what this charge is?
How can I get this removed as I am concerned it may affect me in the future?
thanks for any assistance you can give me,
Fred

davidmcn

What makes you think it's a charge? It looks like it's just a deed referred to for covenants.

ThePants999

That's definitely not a charge, and there's no way of removing it unless you can prove it wrong by producing either the original conveyance or the deed and showing that they reference no covenants. On the other hand, it's also very unlikely to affect you in future - if I were a buyer, I'd be unconcerned by a reference to 130-year-old covenants that nobody has a record of.

On the plus side, you now know exactly when it was built, not just "around 1900"

SmashedAvacado

The covenant benefits the land owner by the seller (Royds and Hawkins) at the time of the transfer.

YOu can't apply to have this removed without evidence that it has been released by the current owner of the land

i suspect you have indemnity insurance in relation to these covenants and one of the conditions is that you don't do anything in relation to them - and in particular that would mean not apply to the land registry or the relevant person who might own the benefiting land for their release as to do so would invalidate the insurance. if you dont have insurance its because your solicitor managed to establish what the covenants related to when you purchased and was satisfied that you were not going to breach them.

This is one to leave well alone.

SmashedAvacado

ThePants999 wrote: »

That's definitely not a charge, and there's no way of removing it unless you can prove it wrong by producing either the original conveyance or the deed and showing that they reference no covenants. On the other hand, it's also very unlikely to affect you in future - if I were a buyer, I'd be unconcerned by a reference to 130-year-old covenants that nobody has a record of.

On the plus side, you now know exactly when it was built, not just "around 1900"

It is listed in the "Charges Register" which is why the OP believes it to be a charge. It is an encumbrance / burden on the property -and properly registered in the charges register - which contains more than just financial charges

G_M

when the property was first built ("around 1900" ie 1889), the land and/or property was sold by the SPC to Henry & Edwards. Part of that sale included some covenants (conditions) eg perhaps not to run a business, or keep pigs, or build a 2nd home in the garden, or whatever...


Those covenants would bind the original owners (H & E) and all subsequent owners. It's not a Charge.



The problem you have is that without a copy of the Conveyance dated 1889, you don't know what the covenants are.


However, the likelyhood of the SPC or their successors a) knowing about the covenants themselves and b) caring enough to enforce them is very low. And quite likely the covenants are irrelavant in this day and age (though my property has a 'no consumption of alcohol' covenant - which of course I adhere to.......).


Any future buyer might ask you about the covenants. You would a) say you don't know and b) offer them an indemnity insurance policy (£100?) to cover their costs if by some chance someone tried to enforce the covenants.

ThePants999

G_M wrote: »

Any future buyer might ask you about the covenants. You would a) say you don't know and b) offer them an indemnity insurance policy (£100?) to cover their costs if by some chance someone tried to enforce the covenants.

Speak for yourself - I would stop at (a)!

G_M

ThePants999 wrote: »

Speak for yourself - I would stop at (a)!

Agree.
b) was suggested so OP could see there was a fall-back if a buyer got cold feet - as we often see here.

Faith1960

Hi, we have had a similar issue recently when selling our property that we have lived in for over 26 years. Our buyer received their report on title and was informed that there were restrictive covenants on our property that were placed there when the houses were built in 1953. These restrictions forbade any future alterations to be made to the property. Unfortunately our buyer, who had plans to make extensive alterations to our property, wasn't prepared to take the "small but real risk" as his solicitor put it and decided to withdraw their offer. The fact that nearly every house down my street has been altered, some extensively, didn't allay their fears even when their solicitor tried to track down the current beneficiary of the covenant without success.

Our solicitor told us that nearly 50% of properties in the UK have some kind of restrictive covenant - some more restrictive than others - but that the majority are prepared to take the risk knowing that the likelihood of any beneficiary being located and actually taking action is very low.

As has been mentioned most people would simply cover it with an indemnity insurance policy but unfortunately these covenants do not expire and cannot be removed - and if you did attempt to do this you may well open up a huge can of worms so I would strongly advise you not to look any further.

ThePants999

I think that the fact that some tiny proportion of excessively paranoid buyers might have an issue with the property when you come to sell it years down the line is a poor reason not to buy a home that's right for you.