"Uninterrupted access" meaning in a Restrictive Covenant

[edgriff434]

I have a restrictive covenant in place granting me "unrestricted access" to my property, which is residential and not business, which involves me going through a private housing estate. My family sold the land to allow the housing estate to be built, and that is why we have the covenant in place, so that we would always be able to enjoy access to our land. The residents of the estate now close a gate at one end of the estate with unbelievable regularity, ie. if I nip down for ten minutes, I will return to it shut. Can they continue to do this, or could I seek an injunction to get the gate removed, as my understanding of "uninterupted access" would suggest no interference with my right of way? They claim they do it to maintain their privacy, but there is a gate at the other end of the estate which they all use, so is left open all hours of the day - which I believe undermines their argument as to wanting privacy. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

[bednobs]

is the gate locked? And which is it uninterrupted or unrestricted?

[edgriff434]

The covenant gives me "unrestricted access". They are not locking the gate but have told us that they may do. I have tried to resolve things amicably but they are continuing to be pathetic about the whole issue.

[edgriff434]

Right. Apologies. I have got it wrong. Again. It is "uninterrupted access". Sorry!

[ChuckFickens]

A unlocked gate is not restricting or obstructing your access. (there are probably 100's of thousands of right of ways in the country that require a gate to be opened to gain access)

If they start locking it then that's a different matter.

[bednobs]

but if they lock it and give you a key, that'll be ok wont it?

[edgriff434]

I don't know the legal position, but the covenant is in place so that I can access my property, as can my friends and relatives. They have suggested locking it and giving em a key, but I fail to see how that is not "uninterrupted". Everytime I wish to go home, or leave home, I have to get out my car and unlock a gate. Any people visiting me would have to phone me and get me to come and unlock it for them. I believe it to be completely unreasonable, and contrary to both the wording and intention of the covenant.

[whiskeryron]

If they want to lock the gate ( or gates) to bar access to strangers or outsiders I can understand that, so if you require ''unrestricted access'' they must supply you with a key.
Ron.

[bednobs]

if the covenant is specific to you, it wont include friends relatives and visitors will it? (i am asking you, not telling you by the way:))
If you are the covenant holder, you can enforce it. perhaps you shpuld consult the legal advice you used when the covenant was placed?

[ChuckFickens]

an access easement would normally apply to all that have a valid reason to use it (friends, relatives, the postman etc..) so a locked gate would certainly be an obstruction to those people. but an unlocked gate is not an obstruction to anyone (a minor inconvenience maybe, but not an obstruction)

but bednobs is correct, the best people to advise on this will be the people that worded the original access easement.

[edgriff434]

The covenant is specific to the owner of the property, and as it is a residential property I am of the belief that in order that I may freely enjoy my property, then it includes the ability to have people come round. The whole problem is really that the gate has not been regularly used for a number of years, perhaps 4times a week, but now I am moving there so it is open a lot more, as I spend more time there. The residents had grown accustomed to it being shut, so are now complaining. Even though they do not shut the other gate, which seems to counter any arguments they have of wanting privacy. Have consulted legal advice, and it hasn't been overly helpful. In all honesty I think that they may shut the gate, but not lock it. I may be wrong but a number of cases regarding uninterrupted access are to do with business premises, and so the courts have allowed gates to be locked outside of business hours, but require them to be open during business hours. Logically for a house there are no business hours and access should be available at all time, so a lock would defeat that. I shut the gate when I'm not there, it's just tedious to go and do some wiring, and 20minutes later find the gate shut. This is not in an urban environment so there aren't hordes of people suddenly walking through, rather it is a prime example of insular community mindsets.

[alexanderd]

Do they also use this gate or does it just lead to your property?

[ChuckFickens]

Would fitting an automatic gate opener be possible? it would probably be cheaper that taking the legal route on this and would keep all parties happy.

[edgriff434]

alexanderd - the gate separates their estate from a strip of land, my property is the other side of that landstrip. They do not use the gate, but are free to walk out of it and then onto a nice walk along the river. There is no exclusivity about the use of the gate.

[edgriff434]

chuckfickens - I have suggested it to them and am happy to contibute to costs. But it is like dealing with children.

[whiskeryron]

I repeat
whiskeryron
If they want to lock the gate ( or gates) to bar access to strangers or outsiders I can understand that, so if you require ''unrestricted access'' they must supply you with a key.
Ron.

Is there a problem with you having a key or is it just that you want everyone else to do as you want & leave the gate open just for your convenience?

[bednobs]

when you say legal advice hasn't been helpful, does that just mean they didn't give you the answer you wanted or were expecting? What did they actually say?

[alexanderd]

The reason I asked was similar to Chucks nswer. Why not get an automatic gate or electronic one with a zapper to open it?

[edgriff434]

whiskeryron the problem with a key is that I do not understand why I should have to get out my car in the rain and unlock a gate to get to my house. If they put a lock n the gate at the other end, I'd be more understanding, but the fact that they do not shows that they are actually just being unreasonable. I don't want the gate left open, I would ideally like a bit of mutual respect in which they appreciate that I will leave the gate open if I will be coming back through it in under 2 hours. If will be longer I will close it behind myself. To me this is an easy and grown up solution. But one with which they are not happy.

[edgriff434]

bednobs - they weren't sure whether or not they could lock the gate, shut the gate, or even have a gate. So definitely not an answer I wanted, as it wasn't really an answer. I do find it staggering that "uninterrupted" could include a locked gate. That certainly was not the intention when the covenant was made.

[bednobs]

i feel for you. You have belatedly realised that 98% of other people are bonkers and not reasonable in any sense at all. Who do you communicate with on the estate side of things? someone who speaks for everyone, or someone who has their own interests in mind? Is it worthwhile meeting with the residents association (if they have one) to work out a way forward. Is there any mileage in complaining about the solicitor who original drew up the covenant (if it is so woolly as to be worthless?)