Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Fortyfoot
    • By Fortyfoot 23rd Mar 17, 8:27 PM
    • 1,789Posts
    • 908Thanks
    Fortyfoot
    Breach of Covenant Question
    • #1
    • 23rd Mar 17, 8:27 PM
    Breach of Covenant Question 23rd Mar 17 at 8:27 PM
    My son has received the letter below along with all the other house owners in the area. Does he need to act or not. He has lived here for about ten years and has not done any building or alterations.

    Is this company just trying to frighten people and make money out of them. Will this company be monitored by the FSA or other governing body?

    Thanks,

    Fortyfoot
Page 6
    • glasgowdan
    • By glasgowdan 18th Jul 17, 8:23 PM
    • 2,909 Posts
    • 3,261 Thanks
    glasgowdan
    Yenton cropping up again! Not sure "any press is better than none" is actually true.
    • Keep pedalling
    • By Keep pedalling 18th Jul 17, 10:23 PM
    • 5,409 Posts
    • 6,092 Thanks
    Keep pedalling
    A small estate Breeden Drive in Curdworth, Warwicksire has now received these letters. Has anyone obtained legal advice? If so, would you mind sharing it in a private email? Thanks very much.
    Originally posted by helenanncooper
    Better sharing in public, this is just more proof that this is a phishing scam, all be it one that throws up real issue for any owner wanting to sell.
    • HughRote7
    • By HughRote7 19th Jul 17, 5:22 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    HughRote7
    I would be very interested to know how many people have actually read the FULL text of the clause 3 in their title deeds. Note I refer to the full text of the clause and not the few words that Gascoines appear to have carefully selected from the clause in their letters. On Gascoines own website is a letter from Langleys Solicitors and a company called 'Hericon'. This letter states:

    The form of transfer which was used when Hericon sold the houses to individual purchasers (who are referred to in each as the "Transferee") include a provision at clause 3 namely:

    The Transferee to the intent and so that the covenant shall be binding on the Property into whosoever the same may come .... hereby covenants with the Company ... that he will at all times hereafter observe and perform restrictions stipulations and conditions set forth in the Third Schedule hereto.

    It then goes on to refer to the Third Schedule.

    The problem is that reading the entire content of Clause 3, in my view, puts an entirely different perspective on the covenant(s). Can Gascoines actually do what they claim to be able to do? Has the Land Registry read clause 3 and understood the implications?
  • Land Registry
    I would be very interested to know how many people have actually read the FULL text of the clause 3 in their title deeds. Note I refer to the full text of the clause and not the few words that Gascoines appear to have carefully selected from the clause in their letters. On Gascoines own website is a letter from Langleys Solicitors and a company called 'Hericon'. This letter states:

    The form of transfer which was used when Hericon sold the houses to individual purchasers (who are referred to in each as the "Transferee") include a provision at clause 3 namely:

    The Transferee to the intent and so that the covenant shall be binding on the Property into whosoever the same may come .... hereby covenants with the Company ... that he will at all times hereafter observe and perform restrictions stipulations and conditions set forth in the Third Schedule hereto.

    It then goes on to refer to the Third Schedule.

    The problem is that reading the entire content of Clause 3, in my view, puts an entirely different perspective on the covenant(s). Can Gascoines actually do what they claim to be able to do? Has the Land Registry read clause 3 and understood the implications?
    Originally posted by HughRote7
    Are you referring to Fortyfoot's post? If so they haven't posted again so we don't know the outcome? Or do you mean something else?

    And you have adde, ........ to edit out, I assume, some of the clauses' wording. What do the ..... replace?
    Official Company Representative
    I am the official company representative of Land Registry. MSE has given permission for me to post in response to queries about the company, so that I can help solve issues. You can see my name on the companies with permission to post list. I am not allowed to tout for business at all. If you believe I am please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com This does NOT imply any form of approval of my company or its products by MSE"
    • spanmedofsky
    • By spanmedofsky 21st Jul 17, 11:05 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    spanmedofsky
    Does anyone know anything else about the Gascoine business ? Still struggling to work out whether this is fake, or just driven by greed or desperation. The Gascoine estate agents based in Southwell says the following.......

    "Gascoines is a highly successful family run estate agent, with over sixty years of experience in the Nottinghamshire property market.

    At the age of just 26 Douglas Gascoine, or DG as he is known by his team, opened his first office in Westgate in Southwell in 1954. Today DG is still very much involved with the day to day running of the company along with his daughter Emma who has the role of director. Upholding our traditions and beliefs whilst successfully evolving into the modern era has given us the success that we hold in todays crowded estate agency market.

    We have four estate agency offices providing residential sales services in Southwell, Ravenshead, Ollerton and Calverton. Head office at Southwell is also where you will find our rentals team who co-ordinate the residential lettings and property management for the entire area.

    At Gascoines we pride ourselves on delivering a personal and dedicated service to our many clients who know us for our professionalism and a customer service ethos which sees our staff going the extra mile on a daily basis.

    Whatever the property transaction, we understand how important it is for you. You can be assured that we will be with you every step of the way and have the technical resources and experience to make your move as quick and easy as possible it is why our clients come back to us time after time.

    We are members of the National Association of Estate Agents, Association of Residential Letting Agents and also members the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. You could not be in better hands."

    Mr Chris Gascoine - please can you come back on the blog and confirm your identity and confirm this is the same business ? Because if you are, how do you square your claims to customer friendliness with intimidating and bullying people that bought properties from you 40 years ago ? Maybe we could have been in better hands ?
    • HughRote7
    • By HughRote7 8th Aug 17, 2:16 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    HughRote7
    Breach of Covenent
    The FULL text of clause 3 reads as follows:

    3. The Transferee to the intent and so that the covenant shall be binding on the Property into whosoever the same may come and for the benefit and protection of the Company Estate (which Estate shall in this Transfer mean all the land now or formerly included in the Title above referred to) hereby covenants with the Company and also as a separate covenant with every other person who is now the owner of any part of the Company’s Estate that he will at all times hereafter observe and perform restrictions stipulations and conditions set forth in the Third Schedule hereto.

    In other words every property owner not only not only has covenanted with 'The Company' but with every other owner so for example if there were 120 houses on an estate that equates to 120 x 120 = 14,400 additional separate, identical reciprocal covenants, or a total of 14,520. Therefore how can 'The Company' release individual owners from the covenant and vary the Third Shedule on an Ad Hoc basis without destroying the whole concept of reciprocity implied by the clause? Surely any individual release must by implication release the remaining owners (14,399 in above example) from the same obligations!

    Gascoines' demand conveniently ommitted any reference to the conjugate term 'and also'!
    • nikkih72
    • By nikkih72 8th Aug 17, 4:20 PM
    • 64 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    nikkih72
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/786983251448976/?multi_permalinks=919671731513460&comment_id=91980 2084833758&notif_t=like&notif_id=1502204350444291
    • nikkih72
    • By nikkih72 8th Aug 17, 4:25 PM
    • 64 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    nikkih72
    This is a SCAM, its been doing the rounds for months now, join the above group and post it on there, I'm sure they will assure u
    • shortcrust
    • By shortcrust 8th Aug 17, 5:16 PM
    • 2,102 Posts
    • 3,205 Thanks
    shortcrust
    Even if it isn't a scam I'd be amazed if they'd ever take action against anyone. Clearly the model is to send out thousands and hope few bite.

    Shame the OP hasn't returned.
    Last edited by shortcrust; 08-08-2017 at 5:18 PM.
    • Fortyfoot
    • By Fortyfoot 16th Apr 18, 12:14 PM
    • 1,789 Posts
    • 908 Thanks
    Fortyfoot
    Sorry for the delay in responding.

    About 25 owners used a solicitor who indicated that the companies actions were not very professional.

    About 20 of the owners paid up so as to avoid future trouble and price increases. My son paid in the region of £400.

    Fortyfoot
    • Brock_and_Roll
    • By Brock_and_Roll 16th Apr 18, 2:11 PM
    • 860 Posts
    • 860 Thanks
    Brock_and_Roll
    For those internet domain registry fans out there I notice that Gascoines are now rather bizzarely using the Colombia country code .co for their domain and email. www.gascoines.co as well as www.gascoines.com . At least in the case of the Colombian one, the old boy founder/principal is listed as the registrant.


    Given that he is 91 years old, I wonder how much he is up to speed with the practices of the firm?
    • Badger50
    • By Badger50 16th Apr 18, 9:26 PM
    • 103 Posts
    • 106 Thanks
    Badger50
    This is a scam. The right to enforce restrictive covenants runs with ownership of the land. The developer loses the right to enforce them when he sells the other properties on the development. In my own case the restrictive covenants are theoretically enforceable by dozens of other home owners on the same estate but not the original seller.
    • shortcrust
    • By shortcrust 17th Apr 18, 12:28 PM
    • 2,102 Posts
    • 3,205 Thanks
    shortcrust
    Thanks for the update, OP!
    • jamesperrett
    • By jamesperrett 17th Apr 18, 11:46 PM
    • 823 Posts
    • 449 Thanks
    jamesperrett
    This is a scam. The right to enforce restrictive covenants runs with ownership of the land. The developer loses the right to enforce them when he sells the other properties on the development. In my own case the restrictive covenants are theoretically enforceable by dozens of other home owners on the same estate but not the original seller.
    Originally posted by Badger50
    What if the developer retains ownership of some of the land? There's a patch of land next to our house which is still registered to the original developer of our road (although they claim to know nothing about it).
    • Badger50
    • By Badger50 18th Apr 18, 5:33 PM
    • 103 Posts
    • 106 Thanks
    Badger50
    Start using it and register adverse possession in 10 years time!
    • EachPenny
    • By EachPenny 18th Apr 18, 8:09 PM
    • 6,570 Posts
    • 17,630 Thanks
    EachPenny
    This is a scam. The right to enforce restrictive covenants runs with ownership of the land. The developer loses the right to enforce them when he sells the other properties on the development. In my own case the restrictive covenants are theoretically enforceable by dozens of other home owners on the same estate but not the original seller.
    Originally posted by Badger50
    Not necessarily. It depends on the wording of the covenant and who it is for the benefit of.
    "In the future, everyone will be rich for 15 minutes"
    • Badger50
    • By Badger50 19th Apr 18, 12:28 PM
    • 103 Posts
    • 106 Thanks
    Badger50
    What if the developer retains ownership of some of the land? There's a patch of land next to our house which is still registered to the original developer of our road (although they claim to know nothing about it).
    Applicable covenants run with the land so in that case the original owner retains the benefit of the covenant. But to get any significant remedy for breach from the courts he would have to show that he was adversely affected by the breach. Even if you paid the original owner to discharge the covenants they would still be enforceable by e.g. your neighbours who would find it much easier to show that they have been or would be adversely affected by a breach.

    Not necessarily. It depends on the wording of the covenant and who it is for the benefit of.
    Some covenants are personal and in that case the benefit and burden do not pass to successors in title.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,371Posts Today

9,060Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @Dora_Haf: @MartinSLewis So many people on here saying they're great until you get your PROPER job. What if Your proper job Is ON zero?

  • RT @hslt88: @MartinSLewis I?m a trustee for a youth charity. We only have a limited pool of funds for flexible youth workers for holiday sc?

  • RT @Dan_i_elle_88: @MartinSLewis Loved working zero hour agency care work. Never out of work and I loved having the flexibility! Only left?

  • Follow Martin