Message Forums

The Local Authority does not enforce these restrictive covenants. Such covenants fall into two categories

1. Those that are personal - usually between the original builder and the original purchaser and can be enforced for so long as that builder has any legal interest in any part of the estate that the covenant is expressed to benefit.

2. Those that are expressed to be for the benefit of each and every part of your estate and are written in such a way that they can be enforced by every house owner on the estate even if they cannot see your caravan or your house.

A restrictive covenant, to be enforceable, has to have some land that it is expressed to be for  the benefit of. So, in the two cases identified, the land which benefits from your restrictive covenant will usually be the rest of the estate when first built.

You need to have a look at your covenant, maybe write it verbatim on this board to ascertain just how the covenant has been expressed to decide just who can enforce it. It's a begger if it is in case 2 above as you would need the consent of everyone on your estate to agree to its waiver. Then that waiver has to be in writing otherwise when someone who has waived enforcement sells their house the new beneficiary of the covenant could still enforce it against you. If you want that waiver of their rights from everyone, I guess that they would want you to pay their legal cost and that would be a tidy sum if you live on a large estate.

If your covenant is only enforceable by the builder and it has sold all of its land that benefits from the covenant, then that builder cannot enforce it. However, If you purchased your house directly from the builder, it may still be able to enforce it as covenants are also personal agreements.  If the builder still retains some land but has sold all of the houses they tend not to be that concerned about breaches of covenant. However, before they will release you from your obligations they tend to want everyone on the estate to agree to it being waived. Again, an expense.

Many an estate, is vested in a "shelf" company specifically set up to hold the land and sell the houses. When the houses have all been sold the company is wound up. So no builder to challenge the breach of the covenant. This also means that if the house is dodgy the owner has no one to sue!!!!

Just becasue there is a restrictive covenant it does not necessarily mean that you can't do what that covenant prohibits. If no one takes action to enforce the covenant then there is nothing to worry about. You just leave the van on the drive knowing that one day someone may make you move it. If anyone does want to enforce the covenant they have to go to court and incur costs and there is no guarantee that the Court would award them costs even if they win. So they have to think long and hard about litigation.

Phil

I think if the house has a covenent it can be enfoced if someone wanted to pursue it.

When we bought our last house, I had to let a couple of houses go that we really liked because they were relatively new build and had restrictive covenents.

We ended up buying an older property with a decent drive that I had enlarged to take our caravan. The only covenent we have on our property is that we are not allowed to keep chickens!   

All the houses on our estate are subject to type 2.  

And yes, it has been enforced - when someone was keeping a van on such a small drive it was a nuisance to neighbours (with the hitch well into the pavement area).  apparently the threat of legal proceedings was enough to make the offenders move it.

There are other people here who do keep a van on their driveway and have no problem but this is where the space available is obviously sufficiently large and is not causing an access/light problem to anyone else.  However, if someone took it upon themselves to enforce the covenant, it would have to be shifted and the people concerned know that.

In theory I could keep mine on the drive but choose not to, mainly because I don't want to advertise to all the burglars when I'm not at home but also because it would mean moving it every time the bin men call and I wouldn't have space to park my cars. 

Now there's a thing. You will get away with it but here is a little legal nuance.....the limitation period for taking legal action is 12 years. So you may think that with the breach having ocurred some 30 years back you are in the clear. NO. Yesterday you breached the covenant and that is less than 12 years ago.

Anyway, if anyone does take action, millermicm, the court is likely to find that you are in the wrong, so the plaintiff wins........ but not order enforcement due to the length of time you have been in the wrong...and that's another legal nuance.....

Love these kind of cases....

Phil

The Local Authority would struggle to proove that a caravan on a drive was a "statutory" nuisance, and which are the only kinds of nuisance they get involved in. So, if you are using the CD player at full volume in the early hours of the morning they may have something on you but not otherwise. If there is a planning condition attached to the property prohibiting a caravan on the drive they may have some right to chase you but such conditions just don't get applied. Then again, with the proposed temporary changes to planning legislation you can extend your house by some 25 feet so a caravan fits that bill!!!!

Phil

PS - if your neighbour just objects to looking at your van, they often come up with the "right to light" argument to try and get it moved. To complain that your caravan is affecting their light they have to be able to show that they have an actual  "right to light" from the spot where your caravan is parked. We don't always have any right to light

A Right of Light has to be acquired before you can claim it. It is acquired either by common law, granted by the Prescription Act 1832, or granted to any previous occupier of the house under a written agreement.

To claim a Common law right the neighbour would need to show that the “light” to the window has been there since 1189. So we can forget that

Under the Prescription Act the neighbour would need to show a minimum of 20 years enjoyment of light through the window or opening they claim your caravan is adversely affecting. 20 years enjoyment can be challenged at law. However, if the neighbour can show 40 years uninterrupted enjoyment of light then that claim cannot be challenged. 

When selling a house on an estate it is common practice for builders to specifically state that the purchaser has no right of light over the adjoining land. This means that the builder can be free to develop the land next door as it chooses.

If the neighbour can successfully claim a “right to light” he/she then has to show that the reduction in light makes the property less fit than it was for its purpose. Many a caravan on a drive tends to be overlooking the next door's drive so they have a difficulty showing a diminution in the "fitness" or beneficial use of the house in that circumstance

Then there is the 45 degree rule. Draw a line from the mid-point of the sill (of the window your neighbour claims is adversely affected by your caravan), at an angle of 45 degree towards the caravan. If the line touches the caravan it is likely to affect light to the room. Under this rule the van, being only about 8 foot high, is going to have to be right up against the window to satisfy this test.

Phil

Forget "nuisance", for a local authority to be involved it has to be a "statutory nuisance". Noise, smell - kind of thing. Just a caravan on a drive is not a statutory nuisance. A motorhome can be a caravan by the definition of a caravan. That definition does not exclude a box you sleep in with an engine.

Phil