We are currently having problems with neighbours in our street who have recently objected to the parking of my caravan on my private driveway. I have lived in the house from new which we bought almost 31yrs ago, we have owned a touring caravan for approx 27/28yrs and have parked a caravan on our driveway for approx 25/26yrs. We live in a semi detached town house with an elevated living room directly above the garage. Our caravan is parked on a sloped driveway which cannot be seen by neighbours unless you are standing looking out of the window. The caravan is a modern and clean van and is not obstructing the highway or path.
The neighbours who have recently had a solicitor letter sent to us, stating we must move our caravan within 14 days otherwise the issue will be taken further and a court action will ensue. one of the neighbours in question have lived next door to us for 31yrs and the second couple have lived in the street for approx 22yrs and neither of these have objected in this way up until now. One of the couples have had a caravan parked themselves on their drive which seemed fine at the time for them. Now all of a sudden they are objecting to our caravan.
We did not realise the builders covenant mentioned caravans in the deeds of our house which we have just recently recieved from the building society, however the document states ------ "Caravans" not caravan which implies that more than one caravan cannot be parked on the driveway
Does this mean that if it states caravans, that we are not breaking the covenant by only parking 1 caravan on our drive?
Since we have parked the caravan on the driveway for over 26yrs without anybody complaining, do you think this will be taken into account if it was to go to court??????
Can a covenant expire or not?
The neighbours have previously said before that the caravan is de-valuing their house, however there are milk float vans and commercial vans with ladders parked on the path outside of houses which are more slightly than our caravan.
Also would the neighbours have a case trying to push this to court, when its the actual builder who sets the covenants "Would it not be him that needs to enforce it?"
Its causing a lot of tension in the street which we don't want, we hope we are not breaking the covenant but not sure.
Any information or comments on this issue would be greatly appreciated as its causing great distress to my family.
I can always type exactly what the covenant states if needed!
regards
Evet
The Section of the covenant states :
The Forth schedule:
section 3
Not to use or suffer to be used any unbuilt on part of the property hereby conveyed for any purpose except as and for a garden and to keep such garden tidy and free from weeds and rubbish and not to use or permit or suffer the same or any part thereof to be used for the keeping of poultry or bird nor for the parking of caravans.
The document states: - "nor for the parking of caravans"
Am i not right at thinking that is plural? where the form is usually represented orthographically by adding -s to the singular form therefore meaning more than 1 i.e.
I think in this case it would be taken as a collective noun meaning "one or more". Just as a notice saying "cars forbidden" would not mean that you could only drive one car but not two.
Basically you can usually get away with breaking covenants if the originator is not around to enforce it - but it sounds as if in your case they still are. Quite a common covenant on modern estates.
A previous 1930's house of mine had a covenant to say I couldn't hang washing out - but we all did it and no one objected. But builder had disappeared decades ago. And my first house (1905) still had a covenant saying I couldn't make candles or tan leather. My solicitor reckoned this covenant was still valid.
Originally posted by evetsnworb: ......., however the document states ------ "Caravans" not caravan which implies that more than one caravan cannot be parked on the driveway
Does this mean that if it states caravans, that we are not breaking the covenant by only parking 1 caravan on our drive?
Can a covenant expire or not?
Thew fact that the covenant refers to Caravans is to refer to the class of vehicals known as caravans - it is only in that sense that it is plural. Its not a case of one caravan Ok two not, as you are hoping. So yes you are breaking your covenant by parking your caravan.
Covenants can be set aside but you have to go to court to get this done, usually. If your neighbours want to pursue the argument you can try and argue that he covenant has been nullified by people parking their caravans for nearly 30+ years - you may win and may not. The only way to park your caravan in peace is to get the covenant lifted.
If the original builder is no longer in existance then the covenent dies.
Polite letter back and state your caravan has been parked there for years without complaint from anyone and if they wish to pursue the issue then go ahead and issue an enforcement notice.
With regards to it looking awful and unsightly, first as mentioned its an elevated town house and the caravan is parked neatly on the drive. It is only the roof that can be seen and it is in no way blocking any views or day light from the living room window. Yes its been parked on the drive for many yrs as its part of life and we enjoy having weekends away in it. As mentioned if they felt strongly about it then they could have made it clear yrs ago but didn't.
Also there are other commercial vans parked in the street (not on driveways) and are infact parked on the path which if you ask me look worse than a modern caravan on a drive way. If the caravan was old and tatty then fair enough but its not. The people with vans are not being pin pointed about their vans lookly awful and de-valuing the house price only me. I however dont have a problem with the vans as its part of their living and job. I do however know it doesnt state commerical vans in the conenant hence they are not being involved.
Interesting about the "garden issue" as the caravan is parked on a paved driveway (something to look into)
Other interesting point made was the fact that its the builder who should object not the neighbours, the covenant does also state:
"the right to enforce any covenant entered into by the puchaser of any other site on the vendors said estate shall not pass to the purchaser unless such right be expressly assigned to him"
Therfore this means the builder should be the one to enforce it not the neighbours as they dont have the right to do so. Would you say this is correct?
Will the builder want to go to court to enforce something which does not effect him and he has not been made aware of it 25yrs ago?
Originally posted by evetsnworb: With regards to it looking awful and unsightly, first as mentioned its an elevated town house and the caravan is parked neatly on the drive. It is only the roof that can be seen and it is in no way blocking any views or day light from the living room window.
Personally I would find it unsightly if a neighbour had a caravan parked on the driveway, however smart it was. The fact they can't see it from their window is a plus, but presumably they do see it every time they come and go.
Having established you are breaking the covenant, I guess you will have to hope it won't be enforced. Is there some particular reason the neighbours have decided to try to invoke it now, after all this time?
Speak with your original solicitor, they should have pointed this fact out when you first bought the property, it this was not clearly brought to your attention then you could in theory have a claim against your solicitor. You need to check thoroughly the possibility of expiration of the covenant and chase the originators of the covenant to see if they will revoke the details. You could chance it with the fact that you have had no objections to yours or your complaining neighbours' contravention of the covenant however the law is often quite dry in it's rulings and may say that ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Why are your neighbours suddenly objecting if there is no particular unsightlyness and they have used their own driveways to accommodate their vans? Have you had dialogue with your neighbours to establish why this situation has arisen? Speak with the Lands Tribunal or Lands Registry also as they may be able to help, the covenant is only valid if lodged with the land registry so check this also. Bear in mind also the difference between leasehold and freehold. Hope this is of some help.
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do" Benjamin Franklin "Some cause happiness wherever they go - others whenever they go" Oscar Wilde
From know your rights "in the case of covenants of land which may be out of date or impede some reasonable use of the land, you can appeal to the Lands Tribunal to have them modified or discharged" Once again best of luck with this.
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do" Benjamin Franklin "Some cause happiness wherever they go - others whenever they go" Oscar Wilde
For information, having looked further at the Reader's Digest edition of Know your rights, it would appear that you have a good case against your neighbours's complaint. This is in view of the fact that they have taken so long to complain and that it does not cause them any particular loss. It would also appear that they cannot individually bring complaint via the courts, they would have to complain to the person who put the covenant in place and it would be up to them (the covenantees) to enforce the covenant, even then you have a right to appeal if it is not reasonable, in your opinion, to enforce the covenant. I most certainly would suggest that you take legal advice but it looks quite favourable just having looked at the general information within the text I have read.
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do" Benjamin Franklin "Some cause happiness wherever they go - others whenever they go" Oscar Wilde
Originally posted by MELBOY: So who is going to enforce the covenent?
Anyone can including the neighbour who has complained.
The neighbour may complain but they cannot enforce the covenent.
It is the originator who can enforce the covenent if they are still around to enforce it.
I have recent experience of this covenent business locally with similar issues being talked about on here and the outcome was "un- enforcable in law" because the builder was no longer in business after 25years.
A Solicitor's letter means tiddly-squat in legal terms,let them persue the case at some expense to the person who wishes to persue a hopeless case. Mel.
It's hard to believe that after 20+ years of peaceful co-existence the caravan isn't the tip of a different iceberg. Is it being used as the focus for other issues?
Thanks for your reply. However, i have now come to the opinion that the OP post is in all probability not genuine. The reason for this is the way additional information keeps getting added in when someone answers the original point. IMO its all too reminiscent of the recent poster who was "buying" a flat at £50,000 above the market price...
I hope that I have not been duped by somebody who is taking the P. If this person is genuine then they will come back with some sort of response if not then it really is their loss.
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do" Benjamin Franklin "Some cause happiness wherever they go - others whenever they go" Oscar Wilde
From my experience, this situation applies to a couple of areas I know, although it applies to an "Estate" rather than a builder.
They also have rules about caravans, and sign written vans parked on driveways. Any building work has to be passed by them too. They are also involved in the process of buying and selling of properties.
People choose to live there because it's reckoned to be an "up market" area.
........................................................................ Support the PAS Go with the FLO
For those that are doubting whether or not this origianl post was genuine, "IT IS!" I only came on here to try and get some advice from people over the bank holiday weekend as i could not see a solicitor as they were all close (i do have other things i can be doing rather than making stories up!!!!!)
I keep adding things in as people both on this board and another keep mentioning other things i.e. the covenant states no caravans to be parked, however it is refering to a garden and someone pointed out that if its parked on a drive then is this still breaking the covenant?
The covenant is also written in stupid english which can make it tricky to understand.
There are however other issues with the covenant as those neighbours trying to pressure us to move the caravan are also breaking the builders covenant due to them adding on conservetories and making alterations to the prorety (as are loads of others in the street)This is also stated as a no no too.
I dont know whether they got the letter sent to us hoping we would just move the caravan, hoping we would do exactly that, however as mentioned by us looking at the covenant, it is clear that if they try to take us to court about this and get it enforced then this will surely "open up a big can of worms" for the whole street in general (them included).
As someone said to me they can't just pick sections out the covenant to suit them and not expect the other issues to be over looked if it went to court.
We just want to park our caravan on our drive and get on with our lives, we dont want to get into a large battle with street members because people have broke different parts of the covenant. I would say roughly 13-15 out of 22 houses have broke at least 1 covenet set in the deeds. I can see this all getting very meessy.
So we have now come to the conclusion "YES" we are breaking the covenant set by the builder from over 30 yrs ago, however it seems so are a lot of other people in the street (unless they have had permisiion from the builder to build or extend) with i doubt have.
We have a meeting with a solicitor on friday to see what he says (hopefully the neighbours will see sense and not pursue things further)
Thank you to those who have helped me, and the comments from both sides have been all taken on board.
I have already replied to this question on MSE - 20+ year so breach of covenants has been acquiesced in and now too late for any enforcement.
If only the builder can enforce (as seems the case) then builder either no longer in existence or won't want to spend money on something like this which would be received very unsympathetically by a court. Solicitors are trying it on.
As a conveyancing solicitor I believe the information given in the post to be useful but I accept no liability except to fee-paying clients.
Covenants are very tricky, that is why there are so many court cases about them and sometimes a successor to the original builder has the right to enforce them. Do you pay a ground rent or chief rent to anybody as if so they probably have the benefit of the covenant.If so have a look at buying out the rent and getting rid of the covenants.Why not try having a word with your neighbours to solve the problem amicably as having a neighbour dispute will not benefit them or you if you come to sell the house.And to the person who wants to blame the solicitor from 30 years ago, please give us solicitors a break, you really can't blame us for everything. We send you copies of deeds and you can read, please take some responsibility for yourselves and if you don't understand something then ask.
