Good question! Part of the road is adopted and part is not. We have parking issues on both. However, the Covenant does say that parking on the whole of the development is only permitted within designated areas, so don't know if the Covenant has a higher status than the Council.
On the adopted part of the road I don't think the residents would appreciate yellow lines or sign posts which would really detract from the appearance of what is an award winning development.
For the unadopted part of the road system, the tenants have leases with the owners/landlords and I am an owner and as such had to sign the Covenant at the time of purchase to say that I would abide by the rules. So, although the tenants might be breaking the rules (as indeed are some residents) we know we would have to take up the matter with the owners.
We just want to know the viability using the Law and I suppose the importance of the Covenant - the thought being what is the point of it if we realistically cannot use it to make sure they are adhere to.
Sorry - missed your reply to my answer to your last question. We do not want unsightly lines or signs on the development, we want to enforce the covenants that each purchaser had to agree to on purchase.
Yes, we do have a very hard working committee who are at a loss to know what to do next as polite conversations and polite notices do not work.
I don't really understand what happens if someone breaks any of the rules of the covenants. If they are taken to Court, which I read your comments can be very expensive, and the Law upholds that the Covenant has been broken, what exactly can the Development to enforce - so with a parking offence - can we fine the offender? with an unapproved extension for example, can we insist that it is taken down?
I am on a Committee and we all know that there are Covenants, and we all know what they say, but we don't really know what powers we have, so to date have been quite gentle.
I do not have a Lease as an owner. I have just signed a Covenant as a purchaser.
The owners who rent out have leases with their tenants, and in the Leases they cover the parking situation.
So we accept that where tenants break the rules, it will be the Landlord/Owner who pays any fines!
But, back to the Covenant, I still don't understand what powers it gives us
The negative Covenants are within the title of the Properties but the positive ones are not and each purchaser signs the positive covenants to say they accept them etc etc,. This includes the parking statement which says that cars may only be parked on the development within designated areas (which are clearly marked).
I can get a copy of the first Covenant for the properties tonight and scan and email to you tomorrow if this helps. Can I have your email address to do this?
If this thread stays "open", I will do tomorrow when I can get hold of a the original Covenant. What we all sign as subsequent purchaser refers to the original Covenant to say that we accept that.
I did not get an opportunity to find the document last night and scan it, but did have a conversation with the Chairman of the Main Board Ltd Company which oversees the development. He said that car clamping was not now legal on private land, which presumably would be the non adopted part of where we live. As for the adopted part, if there are no signs then the Council would not be interested in clamping and we do not want unsightly signs and yellow markings on the roads, so I was told that there is nothing we can do except polite cajoling into encouraging residents and tenants to park sensibly and in the correct places. Do you agree?