How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Buachaill Your Own Question
Buachaill
Buachaill, Barrister
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 10525
Experience:  Barrister 17 years experience
53108719
Type Your Law Question Here...
Buachaill is online now

My dad sold 2 acres of land, which was going to be used as

Resolved Question:

My dad sold 2 acres of land, which was going to be used as a nursery and this is the charges below. Now the Nursery has been knocked down and been used as a normal house with no Nursery use, but this is not what my dad sold them. What are my rights can they use it like this or does there have to be a Nursery?
"FOR the benefit and protection of the property retained by the Vendors
shown edged green on the said plan and each and every part thereof and
so as to bind so far as may be the property hereby conveyed into
whosesoever hands the same may come the Purchaser hereby covenants with
the Vendors and the owners or owners for the time being of the said
property retained that the Purchaser and the persons driving title
under him will not erect on the property hereby conveyed any buildings
other than a single dwellinghouse with a garage and the usual
outbuildings and such buildings and glasshouses as may be required for
the use of the property hereby conveyed as a Nursery."
Thanks.
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Buachaill replied 1 year ago.
1. The restrictive covenant which you quote in your question, does not do either of two things:- Firstly, it does not prevent the house from being used as a house if the nursery business is no longer in existence. Secondly, it does not prevent the nursery business being closed.
Expert:  Buachaill replied 1 year ago.
2. Whilst it was clearly the intention of the person selling the plot, that a dwelling house be erected only to assist in running the nursery business, it does not deal with the situation after the house has been built. Once the house has been built, the restrictive covenant only prohibits other building on the property.
Expert:  Buachaill replied 1 year ago.
3. The weakness of the clause is that it does not make the continuing of occupation of the dwelling house contingent upon the nursery continuing in business. Accordingly, the clause cannot be used to prevent occurring, what your Dad didn't want. Namely, a house being built and no nursery use, I regret to say.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Thanks for that, not good news but at least they can't build any more houses on it. can they put up horse stables and use the land as a paddock ? As this is what they have done ?
Expert:  Buachaill replied 1 year ago.
4. They could have put up the "usual outbuildings" which means that if it is a country area, they could erect stables for a horse. However, this was only legal if it was done before the nursery was ended. If the stables was erected after the nursery ended, then it is caught by the restrictive covenant as any building is contingent upon the nursery being there and the land being used for the purposes of a nursery. So if the stables was built after the nursery ceased, it is caught by the restrictive covenant. However, there is nothing to stop the field being used as a paddock.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
They knocked it down ! thank you for all your help on this .
Really quick and really good .
Expert:  Buachaill replied 1 year ago.
5. Please RATE the Answer as unless you RATE the answer your Expert receives no part of the monies you have paid the website so there is no incentive to answer any more questions.
Buachaill and 3 other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Oh sorry did not know thanks !