Back To “Restrictive covenants on property

166 thoughts on “Restrictive covenants on property”

  1. We live in a house that was built as part of a new build estate (~50 houses) in the early 1990’s. The estate was built with plenty of green space (a park) and wide grass verges. Our house has a particularly wide verge which constitutes party of our garden however a wall was built well inside the verge to enclose our garden. So in effect I have a large expanse of lawn that belongs to us but according the freehold we can’t do anything with it apart maintain it. We would like to incorporate this lawn into our garden and move the wall closer to the verge. Does this constitute a restrictive convenant? Clearly y when the estate was built they wanted lots of greenery to grow, 30+ years later we have lots of greenery and I have a peice of land/lawn that I maintain but can’t use! It is also becoming increasingly difficult to maintain due to a hedge and I have no incentive to look after it properly. Any thoughts welcome? Thank you

    1. Thank you for your comment.

      We would need to consider what the title deeds say in terms of any restrictions, but in theory, if someone owns freehold land with no restrictions on it then they can do what they want with it, subject to building and planning regulations and not causing a nuisance to neighbours etc.

      If you would like us to consider your title deeds and provide advice, please do feel free to get in touch.

  2. Hi I am buying an unregistered piece of land and there is permission to build 2 bungalows on it. At the moment there is only one on there built 40 years ago. We plan to build another. The deed says that any building plans must be approved by the vendor or his surveyor. What if they refuse our plans or ignore our request. The document does not mention that they can’t refuse reasonable requests.

    1. Thank you for your comment.

      If you have not yet committed to purchase the property, we suggest you discuss this particular point with your solicitor. If the person with the benefit of the restrictive covenant is still about, there could be some scope to ask the seller to come to an agreement with them about removing it.

      The precise terms of the restrictive covenant would need to be considered before we could provide any advice and as part of that we would need to consider what the restrictive covenant was intending to protect at the time it was granted. It strikes us that it was always envisaged that there will be a maximum of two bungalows and that perhaps what is thought to be protected is against overcrowding. It could be the case that what is to be protected is the amenity value of the area and the look of the properties. It may therefore be the case that depending on the purpose of the restrictive covenant there is scope to argue that reasonable requests cannot be refused.

      If you would like to consider the matter in more detail, please do feel free to get in touch.

  3. My lease has the restricted covenants as FIRST PART and SECOND PART, what is the significance of these parts? and why break them into these parts and can there be more than 2 parts?

    1. Thank you for your comment.

      We cannot really say much about your lease without having first read it, but the chances are there is probably little of significance to the headings in any lease.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I accept the Privacy Policy