Restrictive Covenants with New Build

Apodemus

Yes, I wonder if the current plants that need to be retained are simply grass and trees, so it would make sense that the trees are retained for the longer term.

As an aside, do covenants pass on with a subsequent sale in England?  My understanding is that these tend to lapse beyond the initial sale in Scotland.

davidmcn

Apodemus said:

My understanding is that these tend to lapse beyond the initial sale in Scotland.

They don't lapse in Scotland (well, not this sort of thing anyway), they're generally set up to be for the mutual benefit of all the proprietors in the estate. Enforcing them is a different matter though. 

AdrianC

There can be as many covenants as they like... but are they planning on enforcing them once they've sold the last house on the development?

OldMusicGuy

Perfectly normal, once the developers are gone, no-one will care (unless you upset your neighbours). We had covenants like this on our last house, we were not supposed to change the planting in the front or even repaint our front door a different colour. We were there 20 years and pretty much every house on the development changed the planting in front of the house, including us. We also repainted our front door a different colour from the original stained look amd there was never any enforcement. However, sometimes neighbours get upset and may use these restrictive covenants to stir up a dispute (parking trade vans is a common one).

You only need to really worry about these "cosmetic" covenants while the developers are there. However, there are some that will affect future saleability (like estate rentcharge enforcement). The terms of how the maintenance of the common areas are managed can also be problematic. These can cause far more serious problems for you than what plants you have in the front garden.

Apodemus

davidmcn said:

Apodemus said:

My understanding is that these tend to lapse beyond the initial sale in Scotland.

They don't lapse in Scotland (well, not this sort of thing anyway), they're generally set up to be for the mutual benefit of all the proprietors in the estate. Enforcing them is a different matter though. 

David,  thanks.   I guess I was thinking of the type of conditions where the Title Conditions Act stopped these being passed on.

mat1964

The one I am currently buying on has a lot of these clauses.  It's quite normal.  Some of them expire after 5 years, some of them are forever.  There weren't any which caused me any alarm.

Section62

stumpygibbon said:

To be honest, this is not enough to put us off, I just wanted opinions on if this is unusual or normal for developments, and if anyone will really care if in 10 years time we change a lavender bush outside. 

With the boundaries between public and private becoming blurred in modern developments it is completely normal to have covenants of this type.

Front gardens might double up as sightlines for roads (especially near junctions), or have a strip of land where utilities are laid. If it is necessary for a driver to be able to see across someone's front garden to see if it is safe to pull out of a side-road then it follows that the owner needs to be restricted in what they can plant to avoid obstructing that sightline.  Likewise utility companies won't want trees planted above their apparatus, or a soil/grass surface being replaced with concrete or tarmac.

Be aware that some of the replies you've had are based on the idea the restrictions are in favour of the developer (who won't care once the development is finished).  You need to check carefully who yours would be in favour of, as it could include a management co, the local council, or a utility company - and they are more likely to have an ongoing interest in enforcement.

neet87

I am buying a house with the same covenants as yours. There is a phrase within mine that refers to 'as per planning permission requirements' which when I looked into it said that planting shouldn't be changed within 5 years of the building being completed. The solicitor has suggested it is open to interpretation whether this applies to all the phrases on planting and only if I was extremely risk adverse would changes be unadvisable. Or like people have said, if neighbours are unhappy about something and want to make life difficult.

stumpygibbon

Thanks everyone - really helpful advice and you've helped put my mind at ease