Leasehold/deeds preventing children?

[India999]

Hi, I am in the process of buying my first property (a leasehold flat) however have just found out I'm pregnant.

I thought all was fine but my solicitor has put a seed of doubt in my mind and it's spiralled! He has said that a freehold owner can put a restriction on children living in a property. Is that true?

I've questioned it but he's said we need to wait until we get the title documents from the seller. I don't know when this will be.

Can someone give me some reassurance?

I think you should prepare yourself for the possibility that you might need to pull out of the purchase. Once you solicitor has read the lease, you will know where you stand.

But I am just an anonymous stranger on the internet. Why believe me rather than a qualified legal professional with all the relevant facts at his disposal?

Sorry if that sounded harsh. It's just that you are paying good money for the solicitor's professional advice. If you don't trust him, why are you using him?

Buying a property is difficult because on one hand it is a business deal for lots of money. Most likely the most expensive thing you will ever buy. On the other hand it is your home and there are a lot of hopes and feelings tied in with it.

It would have to be set out in the deed. The freeholder cannot, simply on a whim, unilaterally impose such a restriction. As FaithFrank says, you're paying a solicitor to advise you on this. Take their advice.

Thanks guys. I know the solicitor will give me the answer eventually.. I'm just panicking a bit and was more so looking for a show of hands; a few people with similar experiences where it worked out or was proven unenforceable etc.

Fingers crossed the solicitor comes back and there is nothing there... I just don't know how long that will take and would quite like a good night's sleep!

Much appreciated.

I'd be curious if such a clause (if it exists) could be enforced ?

That's what I was wondering! I didn't think it could be enforceable which is why it's surprised me that it's come up.

I would imagine age restrictions can be enforceable. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as retirement properties.

I would imagine age restrictions can be enforceable. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as retirement properties.

Doesn't make it right ... also there's a presumption against discrimination based on age, unless I missed something.

Maybe it's just never been challenged before ?

For the sake of argument, supposing someone bought the property 10 years ago, but now has a baby. Would (or could) they be evicted ?

Some age restrictions can be justified, such as retirement properties. An arbitrary no children clause may well be unenforceable, I can't see any reason how it could be justified in legal terms. No pets clauses are generally seen as unenforceable, so I can't see a no children one passing!

But whether you'd want all the hassle that would come with them trying to enforce the clause, is another matter. It could be expensive, even if you won.

But whether you'd want all the hassle that would come with them trying to enforce the clause, is another matter

that's if there's anyone to enforce the clause. DF is still grumpy that despite there being a crystal clear covenant on properties the other side of our alley forbidding any gates into the alley, every house had a gate and when we found the freeholder (quite a feat in the 1980s with no internet) they did nothing - not even reply to the letters we sent.

It would be unusual in a long leasehold (rather than a one year assured shorthold tenancy for example). I wonder why it is in there - eg does the place have very thin walls or the original freeholder hated children or something?

Your solicitor may be able to avise on payment of an indemnity policy to cover against anyone enforcing the covenant. You could also have a look at the properties around and see if anyone there already has children or if it is like an area after the child catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang bang has been round gathering them all up.