bagpuss78

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.

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. 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. Things like no non permanent structures, ask for permission to change any fires etc.

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. And what are the possible repercussions if a previous owner hasn't complied with the covenants?