Restrictive Covenants on a FREEHOLD property with a management company

Maffy52

WIAWSNB said:

On the other hand, do you really want next door to be an Airbnb with a hot tub, a caravan parked outside every second house, daily angle grinding from next door's garage, knickers flapping...

I do agree that many of the conditions are quite sensible (don't park on green areas, don't store hazardous materials, don't block drains etc...) but there are some that just seem to be over-reach....

Flugelhorn

Maffy52 said:

Flugelhorn said:

Maffy52 said:

SarahB16 said:

Mortgage companies will also wish to know of any restrictions on title and this may deter some mortgage companies. Only adding this so you also consider whether these restrictions do reduce the number of financial institutions who will offer a mortgage.  

ooh, yes, important, I didn't think of that as I don't have a mortgage!...

yes you need to look at a deed of variation - the usual situation is that the management company can 
convert your property to leasehold etc if you don't pay the management charge - the mortgage companies have an interest in the property and do not want this to happen - the deed can change things so that the management company have to give notice / details of debt to the mortgage company to enable them to protect the property. 

we got similar done even though we do not have mortgage, our solicitor advised us that most lenders were requiring similar (after some cases in about 2018) and it was better to get it done  in case we wanted to sell

thanks, will look into this as sounds important. I did try to read the managment conditons, but it was about 40 pages of legal speak, just couldn't manage it.
 Did getting the deed added cost a lot to do?

haven't a clue - I got the vendors to arrange and pay for it - had to be signed by us, the management company and the developers. Seemed we weren't the only ones asking for this to be done, paperwork was very quickly produced

Maffy52

Smalltownhypocrite said:

... or 'intoxicated behavior'. 

for real? or you pulling my leg?

Section62

Maffy52 said:

Smalltownhypocrite said:

... or 'intoxicated behavior'. 

for real? or you pulling my leg?

- common with land which was previously owned by a religious organistion etc.

Smalltownhypocrite

Maffy52 said:

Smalltownhypocrite said:

... or 'intoxicated behavior'. 

for real? or you pulling my leg?

Yep as other posters said the land was owned by the church (not even sure which one as their is/was 5 different denominations all next to each other on the same street, I think the LDS church is fairly new but the other 4 are old church buildings), thought that was the most standard/normal one because it was on both.

WIAWSNB

Smalltownhypocrite said:

Maffy52 said:

Smalltownhypocrite said:

... or 'intoxicated behavior'. 

for real? or you pulling my leg?

Yep as other posters said the land was owned by the church (not even sure which one as their is/was 5 different denominations all next to each other on the same street, I think the LDS church is fairly new but the other 4 are old church buildings), thought that was the most standard/normal one because it was on both.

So, the covenantee would have been, um, gawd? In which case, no risk of it being enforced.

incus432

We have moved into a David Wilson estate built in 2016 and many of the same covenants apply here. Some were time limited for 5 years, others passed from the develioper to the Management company.  As others say enforcement is a moot point altough our solicitor advised that if you do breach them it can make selling on more difficult, 

The annoying one for us is the 'no satellite dish solar panel external TV aerial on or forward to the front or side elevation without the written consent of the developer'.  We want to install solar PV and the loft aerial gives a weak signal.  I see several houses have ignored these - going to find out if they got permission first or not. 

WIAWSNB

I suspect that on most such estates, if a consensus was taken on whether to abide by all the covenants or have a free-for-all, the majority would ponder and say, 'abide'.
But could well be wrong.

Flugelhorn

WIAWSNB said:

I suspect that on most such estates, if a consensus was taken on whether to abide by all the covenants or have a free-for-all, the majority would ponder and say, 'abide'.
But could well be wrong.

on ours when such things are muttered about eg the management company writing to everyone to remind them that commercial vehicles and motor-homes / caravans are not allowed, there is a significant minority  who will ignore it or insist that somehow their vehicle is not commercial, or that  others  should be able to keep their caravan because they were a nice family
People do what they want and will justify it any way they can - when they sell they will deny that they have breached any covenants (actually when discussions come up it is apparent that most have never actually read them)

Maffy52

incus432 said:

We have moved into a David Wilson estate built in 2016 and many of the same covenants apply here.

Thanks. The house I am buying is also a David Wilson (I think its called a Bayswater?). It also has a restriction about solar panels, seems both stupid and surprising given how much the government is pushing solar (maybe being mandated for new homes?). I thought about putting them on the garage, but also unclear whether allowed...

Have you had any other issues with your home? (the house I am buying is sold as a part-exchange, so no 'real' vendors to ask any questions about things!)