bagpuss78 Â Â 10 #1 Posted November 16, 2016 We're in the process of purchasing a property that is both freehold and leasehold, and we'd be bound by the covenants of the original leasehold. Â Does anyone know how restrictive these are likely to be in practise? The include requesting permission for any changes to the property, not building any non-permanent structures (guessing even a shed counts in that), requesting permission for any changes to fires, and allowing access by the council to check for state of repair after which they can then enforce demands to repair certain aspects within six months. I also believe there may be restrictions on running a business from the property. Â And what are the possible repercussions if a previous owner hasn't complied with the covenants? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jeffrey Shaw   83 #2 Posted November 21, 2016 We're in the process of purchasing a property that is both freehold and leasehold, and we'd be bound by the covenants of the original leasehold. Really? Are you sure? Normally, the leasehold covenants cease on enfranchisement- whether or not the leasehold merges into the freehold reversion.  And what are the possible repercussions if a previous owner hasn't complied with the covenants? That depends on whether they're still enforceable AND on how long ago any breach was committed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
geared   268 #3 Posted November 21, 2016 We're in the process of purchasing a property that is both freehold and leasehold  Sure you're not buying a leasehold property?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
spider1   11 #4 Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) We're in the process of purchasing a property that is both freehold and leasehold, and we'd be bound by the covenants of the original leasehold. Does anyone know how restrictive these are likely to be in practise? The include requesting permission for any changes to the property, not building any non-permanent structures (guessing even a shed counts in that), requesting permission for any changes to fires, and allowing access by the council to check for state of repair after which they can then enforce demands to repair certain aspects within six months. I also believe there may be restrictions on running a business from the property.  Ansd what are the possible repercussions if a previous owner hasn't complied with the covenants? Yes i have a freehold property that has convents in it . No boundry walls to be built and i had to apply to D.North the builder to build one also no caravans allowed etc The property was freehold from new Edited November 21, 2016 by spider1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
bagpuss78 Â Â 10 #5 Posted November 21, 2016 Yes I'm sure. It's freehold and leasehold. They weren't merged on purchase of the freehold due to what would be lost, I think things like drainage rights etc. Â This means we'll still be bound by the original covenants, but also be freeholders. The lease has another 240 years left, or maybe 140. Â Things like no non permanent structures, ask for permission to change any fires etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jeffrey Shaw   83 #6 Posted November 21, 2016 This means we'll still be bound by the original covenants, but also be freeholders. Not always. The only person entitled to enforce a leasehold covenant is: a. the freehold reversioner [= you]; and b. (occasionally) a neighbouring owner if- but only if- the benefit of the covenant is annexed to that property or there is a formal Building Scheme. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
bagpuss78 Â Â 10 #7 Posted November 21, 2016 In our solicitor paperwork, it says that we need to request permission for various things to the "company" (in this case, the city council) as named in the covenants. So is that no longer the case? I had assumed that the "company" could enforce the covenants. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jeffrey Shaw   83 #8 Posted November 21, 2016 Aha. Special rules apply to Local Authorities if the covenant was imposed under- and makes reference to- a couple of special statutory provisions- one under one of the Local Government Acts [can't recall which] and the other under the Housing Act 1985. Otherwise, no; the rules are the same for any freehold reversioner following enfranchisement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Home2Gnome   10 #9 Posted November 21, 2016 If its an ex council property all though its freehold and you do not have to pay a land charge, there are somethings that you may need to abide by, ie not having fires on the land etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jeffrey Shaw   83 #10 Posted November 21, 2016 If its an ex council property all though its freehold and you do not have to pay a land charge, there are somethings that you may need to abide by, ie not having fires on the land etc. A Land Charge is something entirely different. Enfranchisement means precisely the same for a Council as for any other freehold reversioner. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
poppet2 Â Â 13 #11 Posted October 25, 2017 What if you buy a freehold property and the restrictive covenants state you can't convert the property into flats, do these covenants still apply as you will now be the new freeholder? Many restrictive covenants were made centuries ago, so surely references to chattel and no grazing etc. on your own freehold land, are obsolete, aren't they? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
geared   268 #12 Posted October 25, 2017 Probably best to consult with a legal mind but one like that does sound like a roadblock, especially as you'd need planning permission for the conversion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...