BREACH OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT

Tulips2lips

Gas, electricity, water, telephone to new build are in breach of restrictive covenant as they should have gone over adjacent land and from other more powerful electrical cables but were laid under access road from old electricity supply in breach of restrictive covenant.  Will this invalidate home insurance?  Thanks.

user1977

I don't see what the relevance to home insurance would be?

Aretnap

No impact that I can see on home insurance, which is there to protect you from fires, floods and burglaries, not to enforce restrictive covenants.

The flip side is that if someone came along waving a copy of the restrictive covenant and ordered you to dig up the pipes and cables and relay them elsewhere, the cost of doing this isn't something that would be covered by your home insurance. If you're in the process of buying the house your conveyancer should be able to advise you about insurance that would cover you for beaches of restrictive covenants.

35har1old

Tulips2lips said:

Gas, electricity, water, telephone to new build are in breach of restrictive covenant as they should have gone over adjacent land and from other more powerful electrical cables but were laid under access road from old electricity supply in breach of restrictive covenant.  Will this invalidate home insurance?  Thanks.

You mention all the utilities  but then you same to have a issue with one only.

Tulips2lips

I was thinking if there was a fire due to being connected to old equipment rather than the new substation the insurance wouldn't pay a claim?  Also not disclosing the breach to the home insurance could invalidate the policy?

Aretnap

Tulips2lips said:

I was thinking if there was a fire due to being connected to old equipment rather than the new substation the insurance wouldn't pay a claim?  Also not disclosing the breach to the home insurance could invalidate the policy?

You only have to disclose things to your insurance company if they ask you about them at the time you take out the policy. They ask about previous claims, what the house is built out of, who lives there etc etc - but I've never once had an insurer ask about where the electricity cable goes or what restrictive covenants cover your property. 

By the same token an insurer could only reject a claim if they have a clear term in the policy which says that a fire in these circumstances will not be covered. Again I've never seen a clause in a policy which would allow them to reject a fire claim because the electricity cable was laid on the wrong place. Most don't even say that you have to have your boiler serviced annually, and insurers are quite happy to cover old houses with electric wiring dating from the 1940s - those things feel like much bigger risks.

Veteransaver

Have the utilities been laid across your actual land? (not counting land you may have access or easement over) ? If not then I can't see how it can affect your insurance.
It would be up to someone to enforce the covenant but no one ever seems to do that now anyway

Tulips2lips

Veteransaver said:

Have the utilities been laid across your actual land? (not counting land you may have access or easement over) ? If not then I can't see how it can affect your insurance.
It would be up to someone to enforce the covenant but no one ever seems to do that now anyway

They've been laid under a shared access road in breach of covenant to old electricity cables when they should have been laid over adjoining field with easement to new substation

Tulips2lips

They've been laid under the access road in breach of covenant to old electricity cables when they should have been laid under adjoining field with easement to new substation

unforeseen

Tulips2lips said:

They've been laid under the access road in breach of covenant to old electricity cables when they should have been laid under adjoining field with easement to new substation

who is saying they should have crossed a field and not along the road.

user1977

Tulips2lips said:

if there was a fire due to being connected to old equipment rather than the new substation

Who has told you that's a risk?