fbpx

Restrictive Covenants Can Go Undetected – Use an Expert Conveyancer!

28th August 2019 By Arman Khosravi

Covenants that restrict the use to which properties can be put lurk undetected within many title deeds and can have a dramatic impact on a property’s value. That was certainly so in the case of one unfortunate couple who said that tight restrictions applying to their home had rendered it all but unsaleable.

The case concerned a double-fronted Victorian home that had, during the 1980s, been converted vertically into two freehold properties. One of them, owned by the couple, was subject to covenants that, amongst other things, forbade them from keeping more than one domestic pet, from playing musical instruments or loud music after 11:00pm and from altering the structure or external appearance of the property without the consent of their immediate neighbours.

In applying under Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 for the covenants to be discharged, the couple argued that they only became aware of them when they tried to sell their home and that their discovery had so far put off two potential buyers. The covenants reflected the personal sensitivities of the person who had carried out the conversion more than 30 years ago and the adjoining property was free of any such restrictions. Whilst insisting that they had no wish to be unreasonable, the couple’s neighbours resisted their application on the basis that discharging the covenants would remove valuable protections and potentially affect the value of their own home.

In ruling on the matter, the Upper Tribunal (UT) expressed sympathy for the dilemma in which the couple, through no fault of their own, found themselves. However, the covenants had not been rendered obsolete by changes in the character of the property or the surrounding area. The protections they afforded were not disproportionate and remained of value to their neighbours, whose objection to the couple’s application was neither frivolous nor vexatious.

Whilst refusing to discharge the covenants, the UT directed that they be modified so that the neighbours cannot unreasonably withhold consent to the couple keeping more than one pet, playing music at night or making alterations to their home.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Tenants Can Purchase Freehold When Landlord Cannot Be Found

11th June, 2024 By

The Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 gives qualifying leaseholders the right to join together to buy the freehold of their properties – a process known as collective enfranchisement. A recent case demonstrated that this right can be exercised even when the landlord cannot be found. The leaseholders of two flats in a terraced house wished to purchase it from the landlord, but were unable to ascertain his whereabouts and therefore could not serve notice on him under Section 13 of the Act. They therefore applied for an...

Court Refuses to Set Aside Divorce Order Applied for by Mistake

6th June, 2024 By

While the courts have a range of powers to set aside orders, they will only exercise them in limited circumstances. In a somewhat surprising case that has attracted much comment, the High Court declined to set aside a final order of divorce that had been applied for by mistake. A couple separated in January 2023, after more than 21 years of marriage. In October that year, while financial remedy proceedings were still ongoing, the wife's legal representatives inadvertently applied for a final order of divorce in respect of her instead...

Waiting Time for Grants of Probate Falls

3rd June, 2024 By

Following concerns last year about delays in processing probate applications, recent figures from HM Courts and Tribunals Service show that waiting times for grants of probate are continuing to improve. The average time from submission of a probate application to probate being granted fell to 11.3 weeks in March 2024, a decrease from 13.7 weeks in February and 13.8 weeks in January. This is the lowest figure since March 2023, when the average was 10.8 weeks. The longest waiting time since then was in November, at 15.8 weeks: that month,...

Late Appeal Against Tax Penalties Rejected

31st May, 2024 By

It is incumbent on taxpayers to make sure they fully comply with their obligations to file returns and pay any tax due. The point was illustrated by a recent case in which a taxpayer whose return had not been received by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) failed to persuade the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) that he should be permitted to appeal against the resulting penalties. On the evening of 31 January 2014, the man had completed his 2012/13 Income Tax return on HMRC's website. Shortly afterwards he went to Cyprus, and...