No Need to Pay
29th October 2019
DUAL Asset recently settled another claim involving restrictive covenants. The Insured obtained the policy when they purchased the property, as they intended to demolish and rebuild it with the benefit of planning permission. The property was subject to an historic restrictive covenant, which technically required that the original owner would need to give their prior written consent to any changes to the property.
Following the Insured’s planning application, the covenantee contacted them raising the issue of the restrictive covenant and advising that their permission would be required for the proposed redevelopment. The Insured contacted DUAL Asset who started to look in to the circumstances surrounding the claim.
Our in-house claim’s team searched the area meticulously for property owned by the covenantee and could find none. In order for the restrictive covenant to be enforceable, the covenantee would need to own land adjacent to or in close proximity to the property, which benefitted from the restrictive covenant; there was none.
DUAL Asset drafted a letter of response for the Insured to send to the covenantee, which explained the position and asserted that the covenantee no longer owned any property that benefitted from the restrictive covenants, which were therefore unenforceable. After a bit of to-ing and fro-ing between the Insured and the covenantee (with DUAL Asset’s assistance), the covenantee accepted the position and agreed that they could not enforce the restrictive covenants.
The Insured was delighted and was able to continue with their development plans without incurring any costs or having to make a payment to a third party for consent.