Dropped kerb on freehold property with covenants

Samiad

Ectophile said:

As for an annual fee, that also seems reasonable.  I'm sure you'd complain if after several years, the dropped kerb were to break up or be damaged.  Who would pay for its maintenance then?  You?

Nobody pays an annual fee for a dropped kerb.  Once you have paid the council for the work, it becomes part of the pavement again, and maintenance is paid by your council tax.

Ms_Chocaholic said:

Are you sure they don't want the money off you to turn your front garden into paved parking.

Unfortunately my situation is complicated. Paying the council is a given, but my house has covenants needing permissions from a HA, and we pay a service charge for their ongoing maintenance of stuff. Mostly they cut the grass in the green areas on the estate.
So it's not clear cut  if the estates HA can charge me extra. And yes the latest email from the HA specifically said that we'd need to pay for permission for the kerb and also to drive over their land. This is despite the fact that it's an adopted highway. Hence my confusion.

aoleks

Same here: 1950s ex-council estate, restrictive covenants.

just got our kerb dropped. Around £300 fees (normal application) + £1800 the kerb itself.

we also have a pavement and a green patch between it and the road, no problem at all.

what does the covenant say?

aoleks

Samiad said:

Ectophile said:

As for an annual fee, that also seems reasonable.  I'm sure you'd complain if after several years, the dropped kerb were to break up or be damaged.  Who would pay for its maintenance then?  You?

Nobody pays an annual fee for a dropped kerb.  Once you have paid the council for the work, it becomes part of the pavement again, and maintenance is paid by your council tax.

Ms_Chocaholic said:

Are you sure they don't want the money off you to turn your front garden into paved parking.

Unfortunately my situation is complicated. Paying the council is a given, but my house has covenants needing permissions from a HA, and we pay a service charge for their ongoing maintenance of stuff. Mostly they cut the grass in the green areas on the estate.
So it's not clear cut  if the estates HA can charge me extra. And yes the latest email from the HA specifically said that we'd need to pay for permission for the kerb and also to drive over their land. This is despite the fact that it's an adopted highway. Hence my confusion.

Ok, let’s clarify something. The covenant you refer to applies to your property, up to the boundary and, if I’m not mistaken, is only concerned with structural alterations. A dropped kerb is completely separate from that and has nothing to do with the covenants whatsoever.

You seem to be confusing matters. Get the kerb done through the council and enjoy life, that’s all. There’s nothing else to it. There’s nothing between the house and the road that requires maintenance and the road is public, ao your housing association gas absolutely nothing to do with it.

Section62

aoleks said:

Samiad said:

Unfortunately my situation is complicated. Paying the council is a given, but my house has covenants needing permissions from a HA, and we pay a service charge for their ongoing maintenance of stuff. Mostly they cut the grass in the green areas on the estate.
So it's not clear cut  if the estates HA can charge me extra. And yes the latest email from the HA specifically said that we'd need to pay for permission for the kerb and also to drive over their land. This is despite the fact that it's an adopted highway. Hence my confusion.

Ok, let’s clarify something. The covenant you refer to applies to your property, up to the boundary and, if I’m not mistaken, is only concerned with structural alterations. A dropped kerb is completely separate from that and has nothing to do with the covenants whatsoever.

As Samiad says, the situation is "complicated". A 'dropped kerb' in normal discussion has up to five elements.  The lowered kerb itself, a highway/private verge (optional), a highway/private footway (optional), other private land (optional), the hardstanding (private).

In many cases there are only three - the kerb, a highway footway, the hardstanding.  But in some cases, quite often with ex-LA estates, there can be other combinations. The Housing Association seem to think this is one of the more complex cases for some reason.

The covenant Samiad quoted relates to things within the boundary of their property, but that doesn't mean there aren't other covenants which have the effect the Housing Association say.

aoleks said:

You seem to be confusing matters. Get the kerb done through the council and enjoy life, that’s all. There’s nothing else to it. There’s nothing between the house and the road that requires maintenance and the road is public, ao your housing association gas absolutely nothing to do with it.

Unfortunately we can't say that just by looking at the photo.  There is no boundary feature to show where the highway ends and Samiad's property starts.  It is plausible there is a strip of land somewhere there which belongs to the Housing Association.

As I said yesterday, the way forward is to work out (with the Housing Association) why they think they can make these charges, then dispute them (if appropriate).

aoleks

their boundary is up to where the pavement starts, anything else would be completely illogical.

the covenant quoted refers to structural work on their property and a driveway is not structural (a typical one). unless there are other covenants that are relevant, there's not really an issue here as the council decided the kerb is perfectly safe and workable.

as I said OP, get the kerb done and get confirmation from the council. once that's done, quickly check whether the entire front garden is yours (in length, from house to pavement) and if it is, bring a contractor to build you a driveway and you're done. your housing association has nothing to do with it.

as the house is now freehold, even if they originally maintained the lawn in front of your house, they won't waste any money on it when its private owner can do that, but even if that was the case, a driveway is not structural so unless you can advice of any additional covenants on your deed, you're worrying for nothing.

Section62

aoleks said:

their boundary is up to where the pavement starts, anything else would be completely illogical.

You can't tell where the boundary is just by looking at a picture.

As for logic, google "ransom strip".

aoleks said:

the covenant quoted refers to structural work on their property and a driveway is not structural (a typical one). unless there are other covenants that are relevant, there's not really an issue here as the council decided the kerb is perfectly safe and workable.

"Make any structural or external alterations or additions whatever in or to the property"

Although you could make a case that a hardstanding is not structural (debatable) you would have one heck of a job arguing that it isn't "external".

It is very important to read and fully understand covenants before taking action.

aoleks said:

as I said OP, get the kerb done and get confirmation from the council. once that's done, quickly check whether the entire front garden is yours (in length, from house to pavement) and if it is, bring a contractor to build you a driveway and you're done. your housing association has nothing to do with it.

The time to check ownership of the land is before paying the council to lower the kerb.  If it turns out the Housing Association are right (and Samiad doesn't want to pay their fees) then the money spent on the lowered kerb would be wasted.

aoleks said:

as the house is now freehold, even if they originally maintained the lawn in front of your house, they won't waste any money on it when its private owner can do that, but even if that was the case, a driveway is not structural so unless you can advice of any additional covenants on your deed, you're worrying for nothing.

See above.  As Samiad and I have been saying, this is a complicated situation.  Helpful advice isn't very good if it is wrong.

aoleks

I stand by my point that you're overthinking this and I speak from first hand experience and extensive conversations with the council. I have exactly the same covenant and it's been confirmed to me, in writing, by the local authority's legal department that despite the text, the covenant was put in place with structural work in mind (to the house or outbuildings). for example, I'm perfectly entitled to smash down the front brick fence or lay a driveway, despite these being "ON the property".

Section62

aoleks said:

I stand by my point that you're overthinking this and I speak from first hand experience and extensive conversations with the council. I have exactly the same covenant and it's been confirmed to me, in writing, by the local authority's legal department that despite the text, the covenant was put in place with structural work in mind (to the house or outbuildings). for example, I'm perfectly entitled to smash down the front brick fence or lay a driveway, despite these being "ON the property".

Unless you happen to live on the same estate as Samiad with identical deeds, your experience doesn't necessarily transfer to their situation.

The wording of the covenant is clear - "or external".  Whilst your LA was happy to take a relaxed approach, we already know from Samiad's posts that the Housing Association in his case feel they have grounds to make charges, and this covenant would appear to at least empower them to give/withhold consent.

Your appeal to authority is noted, but you aren't the only one here with first hand experience in this subject.

aoleks

if the entire front garden is theirs and they're not paying any monthly contribution (for what???) at the moment, that won't change if they build a driveway .

Section62

aoleks said:

if the entire front garden is theirs and they're not paying any monthly contribution (for what???) at the moment, that won't change if they build a driveway .

"If" being the most important word in that sentence.

Whether or not the situation with charges will change if Samiad builds a driveway depends entirely on who owns what, where the highway boundary lies, and what rights (to charge) the Housing Association have.

As I indicated earlier in the thread, there is only one way of finding out what the situation is (i.e. discussion with the Housing Association).  Without further information, anything else discussed in this thread about the specifics of Samiad's situation can only be speculation, not fact.