If a development involves adding accommodation to a detached garage or other separate building on a plot - or creating a separate garage or building with accommodation from scratch – this could lead to a breach of the one house per plot covenant.
This is the case even if a planning agreement with Sevenoaks District Council is made which requires the accommodation to be used as part of the main residence. We cannot rely on the Council enforcing such an agreement for an indeterminate period in the future.
The WRA has therefore adopted a policy of asking residents planning such a development to enter into a Deed of Covenant requiring that the separate garage or building should not be let or sold separately from the main house. We have never found that a resident intends a separate sale, but that is no guarantee that a future resident will not attempt such a step. The signing of the Deed makes the position clear and helps to protect all concerned against uncertainty.
Our legal advisor has prepared a standard Deed which can easily be adapted to specific circumstances. We ask that the resident planning the development bear the cost of adapting the Deed, but this should be a simple task. We know that residents involved will naturally take their own advice on this matter. They will find the information on the pages in this Covenants section helpful in briefing their own advisor.
We ask any residents planning such a development to contact the WRA so that we discuss the plans and arrange the Deed. The following points answer specific queries which may arise over the ‘Annexes Deed’:
We have received advice from Legal Counsel to the effect that a potential breach would be mitigated if the new structure was physically integrated or attached to the main house. This will require more than a boundary wall / courtyard or even a covered passage. The link has to be of a permanent nature in brick or other material to match the two buildings.
As mentioned above, Sevenoaks District Council usually incorporates a condition in their planning consents stipulating that any new building should be treated as “ancillary to the principal building and used in conjunction with the latter and shall not be used as a self-contained unit of accommodation”. Whilst such a condition is useful, we cannot rely on the District Council to challenge breaches of it. The Deed of Covenant will incorporate any planning consent and such a condition and thus strengthen the grounds for enforcing it.
The Deed of Covenant would be entered into by the owner of the property concerned, together with trustees of the relevant private road or three or four residents of the road. All the latter parties are entering into the document on the basis that they hold the benefit of the covenants as “trustees” for all persons on the Wildernesse Estate entitled to benefit under the so-called building scheme. The individual Deed of Covenant will be registered against the property owners’ Land Registry title and, thus, any purchaser would be made aware of the obligations it imposes. It is suggested that the individual road trustees enter into the Deed of Covenant because they own the relevant Estate road as well as having homes on it.
There is no liability on the trustees or other residents signing the Deed with the house owner. If an owner of the property concerned later breaches the Deed, any residents may mount a challenge, as with other breaches of covenant. This does not have to be mounted by the initial signatories.