conservatory - breach of covenant? inspection hatch?

[bushbaby_de]

Slightly outside my planning remit so hope one of you builder or lawyer types can help please!

We're buying a house that has a conservatory added by the sellers about 4 years ago. It didn't require planning permission or building regulations approval due to its size, but there was a covenant on the title requiring the permission of the developer before building any extensions. I can't for the life of me see why this is necessary as its a decent sized house and garden so not likely to impact on neighbours but its definitely on the deeds.

Anyway... the consent of the developer was not sought and we are being offered indemnity insurance in lieu of covenant consent by the vendor. What would this actually achieve if the developer suddenly tried to enforce the covenant? Does it somehow magically let us keep the conservatory or just compensate us for having to remove it? The indemnity value matches the price we are paying for the house.

We have also discovered there is a hatch in the floor of the conservatory to allow access to an inspection chamber but when we asked about it were told no permissions were required for this (eg the water or sewerage co) - is this correct?

Thanks chaps.

[dzug2]

Is the developer still in business? If not then the covenant is dead.

[what..the?]

I was informed when this happened to me, that as the person in question who had the benefit of the covenant could not be traced the indemnity insurance would pay out in the event it went to court and if we lost and had the pull down any of our building this amount compensates, or if the person relaxed their covenant then the insurance would pay that. In real terms unless the person just has a personal hatred chances are the person (in your case developer) would prefer to make money on this scenario i.e. sell you the covenant or officially remove the convent from the deeds for monetary value (this is when the indemnity pays out and you keep the conservatory). If he asked for the conservatory to be removed he doesn't get any financial gain the money is given to you in compensation. You can guess what he would prefer. Maybe you would prefer the money instead but it would not be the full value of the house I suspect.

[bushbaby_de]

Yes dzug its a well known housebuilder. We'd rather have the conservatory than the cash, just trying to understand how it works. And whether its right that its been built over an inspection chamber or something!

[jackthehat]

There is generally nothing to prevent you building over an Inspection chamber if it is not possible (or practical) to re-route the drainage to and away.

However, as the Utility company, or indeed the householder, may require access to the system, it is in the householder's best interest to make such access easy and so that it does not result in damage to their own property when access is sought. As that has been done, I can't see that there can be any issue with it.

[The Builder]

I just want to agree with what's been said above. I've taken out Indemnity Insurance many times for all sorts of reasons, usually ancient covenants. I think Mrs What has given you the relevant details. It's a simple procedure. It's vital that the developer remains ignorant of the Insurance (your lawyer will insist on this).......... otherwise he might see potential for a "little earner".

It's impossible to say whether he would take the money, or insist on demolition of course. You would be compensated, but I'm afraid it's completely out of your hands.

As Jack says......... overbuilding a drain or inspection chamber is not unusual, even if not ideal!

[bushbaby_de]

Thanks for your confirmations chaps, you've put my mind at rest. The house is less than 10 years old and the builder is still around so the covenant could theoretically be enforced, so I'll take the indemnity insurance. And make sure I don't put anything heavy over the hatch!

Much appreciate all the help :)

[buildersmate]

I can't add much to the 'experts' answers, other than the reason developers do this is so that they can keep control over what householders do to their properties whilst the overall estate development is still in progress.
I remember once having to request permission from the developer to build an extension - it was £50 they wanted (in 1991). A neighbour did the same extension soon after but failed to get the necessary permission. The house was sold but the buyer's solicitor failed to pick up the deficiency. When that family sold, the next solicitor did pick it up. Unwisely the owner went back to the developer who then demanded £2000 for the required paperwork.

[honky-tonk]

providing that the inspection chamber has been raised to the same level of the floor in the conservatory and there is acsess to it there shouldnt be a problem, i have a raised inspection chamber in my conservatory.

[bushbaby_de]

Thanks for the advice everyone :)