166 thoughts on “Restrictive covenants on property”
I have purchased a property alongside a railway which is under a restrictive covenant that I wasn’t fully aware of I’ve been back and forth in legal fees and consultations about the removal of the covenant as it stopped me from building on the land to which I received planning permission from I have been in talks for now 6/7 years and I’ve loaded out on a lot of money from lawyer fees in law of tort however the beneficiary was not found legally liable for this and though we have been in conversation they did not remove the covenant instead I posed conditions which have not been met and they want to charge me more money to separate the lines of property by contracting out a engineer to check this I feel like I’m being cheated financially and through this legal battle and need help
The restrictive covenant should really have been brought to your attention by your conveyancing solicitor.
We are not certain of what it is you are saying regarding the piston, but if the matter has been through the Court/Tribunal and you were unsuccessful, that may very well be the end of the matter for now.
We would need to review everything before we could realistically even form a preliminary view of your position.
Hello, I wonder if I could get some advice. We live in a very quiet area of 10 new builds and roughly 20 original builds by the same building company. They’re all open plan houses as in no gates, very green areas etc. My husband and I are both medics and sadly one of my husbands patients, we believe, has followed him home and attacked our home with paint etc and vandalised it. My husband works away a lot and I’m home alone with a new baby, I’m currently not sleeping at all (excluding new baby) as I’m afraid it’s so easy to access our property and this person will come back. We’ve added extra security measures etc but I would like to put fencing/walls with a gate around our property. In our contract in states we have a restriction period of 5 years which is so to end, but our restrictive covenant of any fencing, walls, gates, plants higher than 1m is not permitted. Is there anything at all we can do about this? I have wrote to the building company to explain why I would like it and all of our neighbours have agreed and also wish for gates and fences etc. I’m losing a lot of sleep and currently don’t feel same in my own home. Many thanks
We cannot give specific advice on our website, just general guidance on points of law which may or may not apply in the circumstances.
We are of course horrified to hear of what has happened and we would probably recommend you tell the police (so far as you have not already).
As for a restrictive covenant, it is the purpose for which a restrictive covenant is granted in the first instance that is important in determining whether or not any particular course of action would impinge on that.
It sounds to us that the purpose of the restrictive covenant was to maintain a certain look or feel for the area, preserving property values and amenity for residents. It is therefore arguable the extent to which the erection of security measures (unsightly or otherwise) were intended to be curtailed.
Clearly a one-off incident such as this does not necessarily demonstrate that there is a change in the character of the area making the restrictive covenant redundant or “obsolete” but at the same time, clearly you and your neighbours are in agreement that it is not unreasonable to protect one’s property and family; it is hard to see such a desire being unreasonable. The fact that your neighbours’ attitudes accord with yours (and probably most people) might, however, be indicative of a change in the nature or character of the area.
We would need to consider the wording of the restrictive covenant, the parties that are able to enforce it and a bit of the history of the development. After this, it would probably be worthwhile approaching those people with the benefit of any restriction and seeing if they would agree to your proposals. If not and if the facts of the matter were such to justify it, there could be scope to apply to the Upper Tribunal to vary the restrictive covenant on the basis that agreeing to maintain a higher wall is unlikely to be of any detriment to the beneficiaries of the restrictive covenant and that maintaining the restrictive covenant is of no practical benefit to those beneficiaries.
Good morning, I live on a residential estate and our homes have a restrictive covenant in place which prohibits the homes being used for anything other than a single private dwelling.
There has been a planning application made to the council to use a recently sold property as a childs care home. Wouldn’t this be classed a business use? Which is against the restrictions? Also, is a childrens care home classed as a business? Thank you for your help.
Planning policy and the implementation of it is not generally concerned with the legal aspects of any particular property. Put another way, the local authority is not generally going to take into consideration the existence of restrictive covenants or the ability of the applicant to implement their proposals from a legal point of view. All the planning authority is generally concerned with is to ensure that planning policy is not infringed.
We cannot comment on whether or not a children’s care home is classed as a business or not, mainly because it is a fairly esoteric query that we do not immediately know the answer to. What we would say is that there is a distinction to be had between something being classed as a business from a planning policy point of view and from the point of view of the enforcement of a restrictive covenant.
With a restrictive covenant, it is necessary to consider what it was the restrictive covenant intended to protect against at the time it was created. Generally, a prohibition of business use is because neighbours might not want to have to put up with trades that might interfere with their “quiet enjoyment” of their land.
Supporting Farleigh Hospice | Limited Places Available We’re delighted to announce that Cunningtons is once again partnering with Farleigh Hospice for the annual Make a Will charity campaign this September! What We’re Offering ✅ Completely FREE Will preparation by our qualified solicitors;✅ Professional legal advice and guidance on making your Will; and of course,✅ Support […]
Planning for the future as we get older is a vital part of life – that’s why many of us provide for ourselves with pensions and Wills. However, one of the most important tools available to us is often neglected: Lasting Powers of Attorney. According to CanadaLife UK, 78% of UK adults don’t have a […]
Cunningtons help with "Your Legal Journey Through Life". We cover key areas: your first home, your relationships and family law, then growing families, employment matters, dispute resolutions, property investments, and planning your estate. We focus on continuity, trust, understanding clients, and personal service by offering the same legal team throughout life.
I have purchased a property alongside a railway which is under a restrictive covenant that I wasn’t fully aware of I’ve been back and forth in legal fees and consultations about the removal of the covenant as it stopped me from building on the land to which I received planning permission from I have been in talks for now 6/7 years and I’ve loaded out on a lot of money from lawyer fees in law of tort however the beneficiary was not found legally liable for this and though we have been in conversation they did not remove the covenant instead I posed conditions which have not been met and they want to charge me more money to separate the lines of property by contracting out a engineer to check this I feel like I’m being cheated financially and through this legal battle and need help
Thank you for your comment.
We are sorry to hear of your circumstances.
The restrictive covenant should really have been brought to your attention by your conveyancing solicitor.
We are not certain of what it is you are saying regarding the piston, but if the matter has been through the Court/Tribunal and you were unsuccessful, that may very well be the end of the matter for now.
We would need to review everything before we could realistically even form a preliminary view of your position.
Hello, I wonder if I could get some advice.
We live in a very quiet area of 10 new builds and roughly 20 original builds by the same building company. They’re all open plan houses as in no gates, very green areas etc.
My husband and I are both medics and sadly one of my husbands patients, we believe, has followed him home and attacked our home with paint etc and vandalised it.
My husband works away a lot and I’m home alone with a new baby, I’m currently not sleeping at all (excluding new baby) as I’m afraid it’s so easy to access our property and this person will come back. We’ve added extra security measures etc but I would like to put fencing/walls with a gate around our property.
In our contract in states we have a restriction period of 5 years which is so to end, but our restrictive covenant of any fencing, walls, gates, plants higher than 1m is not permitted.
Is there anything at all we can do about this?
I have wrote to the building company to explain why I would like it and all of our neighbours have agreed and also wish for gates and fences etc.
I’m losing a lot of sleep and currently don’t feel same in my own home.
Many thanks
Thank you for your comment.
We cannot give specific advice on our website, just general guidance on points of law which may or may not apply in the circumstances.
We are of course horrified to hear of what has happened and we would probably recommend you tell the police (so far as you have not already).
As for a restrictive covenant, it is the purpose for which a restrictive covenant is granted in the first instance that is important in determining whether or not any particular course of action would impinge on that.
It sounds to us that the purpose of the restrictive covenant was to maintain a certain look or feel for the area, preserving property values and amenity for residents. It is therefore arguable the extent to which the erection of security measures (unsightly or otherwise) were intended to be curtailed.
Clearly a one-off incident such as this does not necessarily demonstrate that there is a change in the character of the area making the restrictive covenant redundant or “obsolete” but at the same time, clearly you and your neighbours are in agreement that it is not unreasonable to protect one’s property and family; it is hard to see such a desire being unreasonable. The fact that your neighbours’ attitudes accord with yours (and probably most people) might, however, be indicative of a change in the nature or character of the area.
We would need to consider the wording of the restrictive covenant, the parties that are able to enforce it and a bit of the history of the development. After this, it would probably be worthwhile approaching those people with the benefit of any restriction and seeing if they would agree to your proposals. If not and if the facts of the matter were such to justify it, there could be scope to apply to the Upper Tribunal to vary the restrictive covenant on the basis that agreeing to maintain a higher wall is unlikely to be of any detriment to the beneficiaries of the restrictive covenant and that maintaining the restrictive covenant is of no practical benefit to those beneficiaries.
Good morning,
I live on a residential estate and our homes have a restrictive covenant in place which prohibits the homes being used for anything other than a single private dwelling.
There has been a planning application made to the council to use a recently sold property as a childs care home. Wouldn’t this be classed a business use? Which is against the restrictions? Also, is a childrens care home classed as a business? Thank you for your help.
Thank you for your comment.
Planning policy and the implementation of it is not generally concerned with the legal aspects of any particular property. Put another way, the local authority is not generally going to take into consideration the existence of restrictive covenants or the ability of the applicant to implement their proposals from a legal point of view. All the planning authority is generally concerned with is to ensure that planning policy is not infringed.
We cannot comment on whether or not a children’s care home is classed as a business or not, mainly because it is a fairly esoteric query that we do not immediately know the answer to. What we would say is that there is a distinction to be had between something being classed as a business from a planning policy point of view and from the point of view of the enforcement of a restrictive covenant.
With a restrictive covenant, it is necessary to consider what it was the restrictive covenant intended to protect against at the time it was created. Generally, a prohibition of business use is because neighbours might not want to have to put up with trades that might interfere with their “quiet enjoyment” of their land.