A couple of strange covenants on house we are buying.

[TooMany2cvs]

Grumpy old git said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Which would come under "decide it's not really needed", wouldn't it?

Assuming the op needs a mortgage, if the seller won't pay, either he pays or the op's solicitor must comply with their obligation to the lender and report the situation to them. The result of which will be the op takes out the polices or doesn't get the mortgage.

Yes, the lender certainly does get a say in whether an indemnity is needed or not.

[JNR77]

The second covenant about extending and altering the house is valid. It is put in place to maintain and preserve the architecture / appearance of the estate. Its included to stop the DIY'er going to mad in B&Q and cladding it in decking! believe me, i have seen it!

Look at it another way, you will benefit from the covenant as it stops other from spoiling the estate.

Is it enforceable? unlikely by bovis but if a neighbour on the estate takes exception to your alteration they could cause you some agro. If you were to carryout the work and decide to sell it may put prospective purchasers off if there is a clear breach of covenant irrespective of if insurance is available.

[blueg33]

I suspect that the current owner has a mortgage, you could ask how he satisfied his mortgage co on these points

[TooMany2cvs]

JNR77 said:

Is it enforceable? unlikely by bovis but...

But nothing. The only person who can enforce a covenant is the beneficiary - Bovis. If they're uninterested (and they will be), then it's game on.

[blueg33]

TooMany2cvs said:

JNR77 said:

Is it enforceable? unlikely by bovis but...

But nothing. The only person who can enforce a covenant is the beneficiary - Bovis. If they're uninterested (and they will be), then it's game on.

Not true at all. Bovis won't be uninterested, they will look to charge a fee for approving the plans. There is a slight question as to whether they could prove a loss, but generally house builders do persue these things especially on comer properties or ones with scope for additional development. My team have always had instructions to visit old sites when in the area and flag any issues etc.

Further the covenant seems to have arisen from the original Section 52 agreement. That is a legal agreement with the local authority that runs with the land and binds successors in title. If Bovis let occupiers make changes without approving them, then they may also be in breach of the Section 52 (subject to the wording) This will probably make insurance harder still.

Back to the covenants.

I have checked the title to the property, the current owners have a mortgage with Nationwide, so they must have satisfied the mortgage co on title issues. I suspect that the fisheries covenant is already insured, Bovis will have done it as they had to satisfy many buyers and solicitors. Before paying for anything get your solicitor to ask the sellers how they satisfied Nationwide.

Note that the Council as well as Bovis are beneficiaries of covenants relating to non alteration

Charge Number 1 is almost certainly insured already
Charge number 2 the fisheries charge is almost certainly insured already
Charge number 3 I think will be difficult to insure but you should ask BEFORE you make contact with Bovis or the Council

IMO sellers solicitor isn't doing a great job and your solicitor shuld be pushing for more info

Op. IMO none of these things are deal breakers, but definitely chase up existing insurances and enquire about insuring the Bovis covenant.

[JNR77]

TooMany2cvs said:

But nothing. The only person who can enforce a covenant is the beneficiary - Bovis. If they're uninterested (and they will be), then it's game on.

Really?

If you flag it up with Bovis i dont think you will get Insurance. There is always the chance that the retired duffer over the road who purchased his house new and knows the title document inside out and will get on the phone to Bovis.

Is it freehold or leasehold? if leasehold some freeholders sell off portfolios of long leaseholds estates to prop co's who make there money on enforcing covenants. Google maps has made their lives much easier so they can see the conservatory extension without leaving the office!

If the vendor isn't prepared to cover the insurance cost i would suggest obtaining consent for the alterations from the beneficiary of the covenant before you purchase the property, unfortunately this will involve costs, probably more than the insurance!!

[blueg33]

JNR77 said:

TooMany2cvs said:

But nothing. The only person who can enforce a covenant is the beneficiary - Bovis. If they're uninterested (and they will be), then it's game on.

Really?

If you flag it up with Bovis i dont think you will get Insurance. There is always the chance that the retired duffer over the road who purchased his house new and knows the title document inside out and will get on the phone to Bovis.

Is it freehold or leasehold? if leasehold some freeholders sell off portfolios of long leaseholds estates to prop co's who make there money on enforcing covenants. Google maps has made their lives much easier so they can see the conservatory extension without leaving the office!

If the vendor isn't prepared to cover the insurance cost i would suggest obtaining consent for the alterations from the beneficiary of the covenant before you purchase the property, unfortunately this will involve costs, probably more than the insurance!!

Its freehold - I have the title on my screen. You are dead right about the neighbours