Can a freeholder prevent you from extending property?

Fact is land value is reflected by what is on it.

And freeholder has all right to decide what that is.

House is not something you can pack up and take with you.

This is true.

But you have a right to buy the freehold or to extend the lease, neither of which can be denied.

Freeholder has right to decide about extensions.

Depending on the details of the lease, yes.

From what I've read they are rarely refused, it's just an excuse to charge an admin fee.

Another thing is is the lease relating to land or house and land or flat.

OP relates to flat.

This is true, and flats are different to houses, often the freehold owner is responsible for the actual building, unlike with a house, which would alter things significantly.

You may need freeholder permission to make alterations and that is in your lease. Covenants are set in stone. You brake them, you suffer. Court action needs to be taken to force you to anything, but you can be charged for paperwork a lot before that even happens.

They can charge you for paperwork, surveys and such anyway. Whatever they see fit.

I don't think there will be many cases where people altered property without consent.

Noone will consciously want to put themselves in such vulnerable situation.

I read about one not long ago, but can't recall where.

Who can charge you for paperwork for breaking a covenant? I'm fascinated.

My freehold house has a covenant requiring that I maintain a dwarf wall to the front of the property... Anyone could use a court to have the covenant enforced, but I seriously doubt that they could invoice me for any paperwork.

Who can charge you for paperwork for breaking a covenant? I'm fascinated.

My freehold house has a covenant requiring that I maintain a dwarf wall to the front of the property... Anyone could use a court to have the covenant enforced, but I seriously doubt that they could invoice me for any paperwork.

A covenant binds one property and benefits another, or else it's virtually unenforceable.

But to enforce its burden demands that the benefit be annexed to an adjacent or nearby property.

So enforcement could be by:

a. the freehold reversioner; or

b. (sometimes) a neighbour; or

c. (depending on its wording) by the Local Housing Authority with use of one of two statutory provisions.

Makes sense, so a neighbour or the local authority could apply to have the covenant enforced on me (had I removed my wall).

I was more interested in the claim by Orzel that you could be charged for paperwork regarding the covenant before it was ever taken to court. This is IMO baloney.

Who can charge you for paperwork for breaking a covenant? I'm fascinated.

My freehold house has a covenant requiring that I maintain a dwarf wall to the front of the property... Anyone could use a court to have the covenant enforced, but I seriously doubt that they could invoice me for any paperwork.

You won't get charged for paperwork FOR breaking covenant.

You can be charged for paperwork, legal fees, surveys and other AS A RESULT of breaking covenant. Before going to court.

I said charged remember. You could of course decline invoice and that wouldn't be enforceable before landlord goes through court.

If you'll need a solicitor that will cost you.

You are a smart lad, you can probably see how that works.