Restrictive Covenants in New Build Contracts

[HMS25]

Our builder has refused permission on the grounds that our proposed sunroom is too big, it is within the restrictions of the permitted development and only takes 13.85% of our garden, anyone had similar problems or got any advice please?

I'm not sure new builds get permitted development rights

Agree, you normally need pp. Are the houses still being built?

I’ve checked the contact and nothing about it been removed

You need to check the pp for the development , it may have been stipulated there.

Check the original planning application. Our builder was granted planning permission on the understanding that there was no further development on properties sold whilst others were still not sold.

A neighbour also came unstuck, thinking they had permitted development rights, put two fingers up to their adjoining neighbours, build an extension and the Council came and told them to take it down.

It may even restrict structures like sheds.

Some interesting replies, thanks for taking the time.
The builder has said it’s too big not that we can’t build it, I’m still awaiting a more detailed explanation, I’ll let you know how it goes

Getting permission from the builder does not mean you can go ahead without pp.

Some houses do have covenants. I would go for PP and there's your answer. So a silly example but where we live , newer builds with off st . parking can't get a parking permit. I have no idea where you Iive but new builds may have different rules - what the builder says essentially doesn't matter - you need permission from the planning committee from the council

( Other Pps have given good advice)

Even if PP is required ( likely on a new build), and granted, the covenant can still prevent it being built. Covenants are not a planning issue and will not be considered by the council when determining any application.

@Seeline - silly example - but true - not a new build , but we had a convenant on a previous house which proscribed being able to use it as a butcher's shop and therefore no extensions. Well covenant was about 80 years previous and overturned - but @seeline - I think I am right in that the covenant was a solicitor thing rather than a planning committee thing - would I be right there ? Maybe rather more difficult for new builds .

Basilisk that would be correct. Covenants are a legal concern rather than planning. It also depends if the other party on the covenant is still around to enforce it, or has passed it on. Often they lapse when developments finish or the builder goes bust. Or it may pass to other freeholders/owner occupiers or a management company.

@LIZS - yes - thank you - this is what happened when a previous house ( well 2 houses ago - built in 1805) had a restrictive covenant to say you could not have a butcher's shop in it) - It was a modest terraced house. But the covenant stopped extra building ( so a kitchen extension) Well it all worked out well as neither DH nor I are butchers and we were not intending to use it as such. It was an old covenant but still on the records. How this applies to a newer house I do not know , but yes @LIZS - as I recall , it was a matter for the solicitor rather than the EA or planning committee. Again - mine was old - not sure how it would work for a newer covenant.

I’m not allowed to sell alcohol from mine. Shame. I always fancied running a pub from home.

Sounds like you own a fleecehold property. This is where you've bought a new build (freehold but not really) but have restrictive covenants on it. Do you pay a maintenance company for upkeep of the surrounding estates or do you have to pay permission fees to the builder for them to give you "permission" to build an extension or change anything about your house. The National Leasehold Campaign might give you some help if this is the case.

Just because there are covenants doesn’t mean it’s leasehold. Mine is most definitely freehold but the builders put restrictive covenants on it. For instance, no boats or caravans to be parked outside houses. It’s not all bad. Mainly they just want to ensure, as much as possible, pleasant living conditions for occupants.

@@AlexaAmbidextra - what a shame between us we could not have sold steak and ale pies

I do think a modern restrictive covenant ( and yes also as you say on freehold properties as well) may be harder to overturn ( mine was old & was obviously not relevant - i.e. the house being a butcher's shop ) but my parents' house has a covenant to not allow high electric gates. ( Not a thing which has ever bothered them - but it is there )

If it is a very new build it may be that the size of house came under what they were allowed to do for the whole development ( i.e. size of the whole development not just your house ) and therefore you need to check with builder what they were allowed to build & covenants if relevant and then check with council planning as to what you are allowed to do. Others have given good advice but in truth , you need to explore everything about your own particular house. I would love a mansard roof. Lots in the general area have them. Mine specifically is not allowed it.

Alexa Ohjustboreoff called it fleecehold i.e. house is freehold but there's still a management company for the roads, shared landscaping etc.

Is your covenant permanent or a fixed term OP? It may be that the builder will allow a smaller extension as they don't want the estate to look too crowded whilst they sell all the properties.