No Cali's allowed !

[andyinluton]

point 5 would seem to be at odds with your opening line?
(I agree with pt. 5 btw)

.

I realise that - But if the covenant says no commercial vehicles there is nothing to worry about, save yourself the cost of a solicitor.

If it says no VW California's specificaly then proper advice is needed to ascertain whats the worst that can happen.

The trouble with taking advice from a solicitor is that Ive never heard one say don't do anything, nice little earner for them if they need to write a few letters.

 

[Jack Burns II]

I realise that - But if the covenant says no commercial vehicles there is nothing to worry about, save yourself the cost of a solicitor.

If it says no VW California's specificaly then proper advice is needed to ascertain whats the worst that can happen.

The trouble with taking advice from a solicitor is that Ive never heard one say don't do anything, nice little earner for them if they need to write a few letters.

Covenant states that we need permission for a caravan, motorhome or boat but doesn't even mention campervans. Does anyone know the difference between 'taxation class' & 'body type' i.e.. diesel car & motor caravan (both of which are stated on the cali's road tax book), which applies here as we have argued that the cali is a diesel car?

 

[skinnywhippet]

As an aside, surely the use these covenants is out of date now, and discriminates against self-employed people. There are more and more people who work for themselves and have a van of some sort. Our area seems full of dog walkers for example; would people object to a little van with cute dog graphics, or is it just plumbers and builders developers don't want?

 

[andyinluton]

Covenant states that we need permission for a caravan, motorhome or boat

Could you post the exact wording with punctuation please. IF its "Caravan, motorhome or boat" that is completely different legally to "Caravan, Motorhome or boat etc"

I seem to remember there is case law relating to this which I will try & dig out this evening. I seem to remember legally there is no definition as to what constitutes a "motorhome" even the biggest white monster has Motor Caravan on the log book exactly the same as your California.

 

[Brindisi]

Are you having a garage built, if so park it in there .

 

[CALI FATE]

Cali van taliban

 

[Velma's Dad]

Tell the developer unless he sees sense we'll all bring our Calis round there and park them up on bricks on the roads round the estate for the winter.

Seriously though, if I was in your position I'd probably do what others have suggested and just ignore them in the first instance. However, I'm not a lawyer and if you seriously think they might actually seek an injunction, you'll obviously need to get a qualified opinion.

Although we on this forum are often strenuously arguing whether a Cali is/isn't a motorhome or motor-caravan (depending what we're trying to achieve re insurance, tax/duties, tunnel fees, bridge tolls, planning permissions, etc etc), I'm sure it would be very dangerous to presume that a civil court in the matter of a land covenant would necessarily recognise any of those particular arguments. After all, a CV and a MH are, when all's said and done, vehicles with similar purposes, it's just the size that differs.

Ejusdem generis ("of the same kind"), a lawyer might argue (but, there again, as I said I'm not one).

 

[Richard Teale]

The only winners will be the solicitors! When is a van not a van? When its a 'motor caravan' or a 'campervan'? Some will argue its still a van. How is 'van' defined in your deeds? The debate could run and run.

I'd either ignore them completely. Or, if you are uncomfortable ignoring the solicitor's letter, reply politely that the California is classed as a motor caravan by the DVLA and is not a commercial vehicle. You might want to check whether your deeds also forbid caravans and motor caravans however :-0

Good luck.

 

[Toot-toot]

Hello Jack Burns 2 been back to minnows recently??
OMG talk about an old fuedal law..... how on earth can someone selling you a house tell you what vehicle you can have??? We thought only those stupid out of date 'fuedal' restrictions only applied to mobile homes !! look into it carefully ( BTW we would also say tell them to beep off)- soooo frustrating but good luck..........

 

[Bigted]

You could ask them to explain how a Cali from an aesthetic point of view is different to a caravelle? Most people cannot tell them apart so how is the visual impact different?

 

[Jack Burns II]

Could you post the exact wording with punctuation please. IF its "Caravan, motorhome or boat" that is completely different legally to "Caravan, Motorhome or boat etc"

I seem to remember there is case law relating to this which I will try & dig out this evening. I seem to remember legally there is no definition as to what constitutes a "motorhome" even the biggest white monster has Motor Caravan on the log book exactly the same as your California.

Thanks will check and get back to you

 

[Jack Burns II]

Hello Jack Burns 2 been back to minnows recently??
OMG talk about an old fuedal law..... how on earth can someone selling you a house tell you what vehicle you can have??? We thought only those stupid out of date 'fuedal' restrictions only applied to mobile homes !! look into it carefully ( BTW we would also say tell them to beep off)- soooo frustrating but good luck..........

Lovely to hear from you, no not back yet. Thank you for your support, we will take this as far as it can go!

 

[andyinluton]

Thats got to be plan B - Swop the badge on the back from california to caravelle
99.9% of the public wouldn't know the difference

 

[DavidofHook]

There is no difference in appearance between a California and a Caravelle. So your neighbour could have a Caravelle but you cannot park your California.

As someone else has said, park it in the road, ideally outside their house.

Oops, just seen your post Andyofluton, great minds!

 

[Amarillo]

We recently moved into a new house and the developer has told us that we cannot park our beloved VW California SE on the driveway as it might encourage 'white vans' and they don't want that. Unbelievable. Our solicitor has written to inform them that it is classified as a 'diesel car' on the road tax book. They replied that it is a campervan on the VW website. Can anyone help us here please?

Lease covenants can be enforced through the First Tier Tribunal (formally [I mean formerly - ooops] the Land Valuation Tribunal)

Decisions at the First Tier Tribunal are here:
http://www.residential-property.judiciary.gov.uk/search/decisions_browse.jsp

--> Select LVT and a region of your choice, then click "Browse".
--> The case sub-type is "Forfeiture" (This is because the ultimate penalty for a breach of covenant is property forfeiture; don't be alarmed: if the FTT finds against you, simply cease the breach and the matter will end there).
--> Click on an authority and year of your choice.

Trawl through the thousands of cases to look for a case similar to yours, and read the findings of the tribunal.

I think that is costs £500 to bring a case to the FTT [edit: the fee is £200], and there is no requirement for legal representation (a solicitor might argue otherwise). As there is no requirement for legal representation, legal costs are not usually awarded, but it is my understanding that the £200 fee is usually borne by the losing party. BE WARNED - solicitors are paid at a FTT win or lose, they have no incentive to warn you away from litigation or to advise you to represent yourself. A FTT will usually consist of three members, one a lawyer, one a surveyor and one a layman, sometimes there will be one person sitting alone. They will make decisions based on the facts. Present the facts as you see them and there is no need for representation.

The FTT is obliged to follow rulings of higher courts, but can disregard the decisions of previous FTT rulings.

As someone else has pointed out, it would be useful to see the exact wording, including punctuation, of the covenant.

 

[BikerGran]

I would ignore it - they may just not push it if you are not intimidated.

I recently had cause to consult the law about a clause (not it sure it counted as a covenant) about fencing, in my late brother's house deeds and was told pretty much what Ady77 said - it would be expensive for him to take it to court and difficult for the court to decide who was right, and he probably wouldn't take it that far - the advice was right, we didn't hear any more.

 

[Joker 1299]

My Caravelle is a van according to our local recycling centre and not allowed in without a permit. Presume you have asked, and they have said no? Maybe they think you will be using it as an extension and sleeping in it? I would advise talking to them reasonably if possible.

 

[Jack Burns II]

Lease covenants can be enforced through the First Tier Tribunal (formally [I mean formerly - ooops] the Land Valuation Tribunal)

Decisions at the First Tier Tribunal are here:
http://www.residential-property.judiciary.gov.uk/search/decisions_browse.jsp

--> Select LVT and a region of your choice, then click "Browse".
--> The case sub-type is "Forfeiture" (This is because the ultimate penalty for a breach of covenant is property forfeiture; don't be alarmed: if the FTT finds against you, simply cease the breach and the matter will end there).
--> Click on an authority and year of your choice.

Trawl through the thousands of cases to look for a case similar to yours, and read the findings of the tribunal.

I think that is costs £500 to bring a case to the FTT [edit: the fee is £200], and there is no requirement for legal representation (a solicitor might argue otherwise). As there is no requirement for legal representation, legal costs are not usually awarded, but it is my understanding that the £200 fee is usually borne by the losing party. BE WARNED - solicitors are paid at a FTT win or lose, they have no incentive to warn you away from litigation or to advise you to represent yourself. A FTT will usually consist of three members, one a lawyer, one a surveyor and one a layman, sometimes there will be one person sitting alone. They will make decisions based on the facts. Present the facts as you see them and there is no need for representation.

The FTT is obliged to follow rulings of higher courts, but can disregard the decisions of previous FTT rulings.

As someone else has pointed out, it would be useful to see the exact wording, including punctuation, of the covenant.[/QUOTE

Thank you for all of this, our solicitor has the documentation but we are contacting them today

 

[Jack Burns II]

Have you actually done what it says and asked their permission?

Yes out of courtesy but some of our neighbours say we are too polite and they would just do their own thing anyway!

 

[Joker 1299]

Is it your daily driver, or is it parked up for extensive periods? I guess that could make a difference.

 

[vmaxkiddy]

Some covenants can seem a bit strange after time and the original purpose for the covenant has passed. Part of my land has a covenant forbidding the building of any fixed structure higher than a potato clamp. This was added by the Air Ministry in 1947 to prevent obstructions to aircraft operating from the adjacent airfield. Relevant then, but not now.

 

[Jack Burns II]

Is it your daily driver, or is it parked up for extensive periods? I guess that could make a difference.

We hope to use it as a daily driver when H retires in a few months

 

[Velma's Dad]

Poor Jack, what a pain it all is for you, and I'd agree that in this case a Cali, of itself, hardly flouts a covenant which was presumably put in to prevent large motorhomes being plonked on driveways (which, let's face it, could certainly affect the value of adjacent properties, including presumably the one the developer has retained for himself).

If I was the developer/beneficiary of the covenant (sounds like they are the same, in this case) I must admit I'd want to maintain the letter of the covenant, to avoid giving precedent. Today a 5-metre VW T6, tomorrow a 6-metre Westphalia Columbus, then a 6-metre 'Great White' and so on.

I guess it also underlines why it's so important to know all the covenants on a property when you buy it. If my conveyancing solicitor hadn't highlighted something like that to me, I'd be bloody furious with them.

 

[Jack Burns II]

Poor Jack, what a pain it all is for you, and I'd agree that in this case a Cali, of itself, hardly flouts a covenant which was presumably put in to prevent large motorhomes being plonked on driveways (which, let's face it, could certainly affect the value of adjacent properties, including presumably the one the developer has retained for himself).

If I was the developer/beneficiary of the covenant (sounds like they are the same, in this case) I must admit I'd want to maintain the letter of the covenant, to avoid giving precedent. Today a 5-metre VW T6, tomorrow a 6-metre Westphalia Columbus, then a 6-metre 'Great White' and so on.

I guess it also underlines why it's so important to know all the covenants on a property when you buy it. If my conveyancing solicitor hadn't highlighted something like that to me, I'd be bloody furious with them.

They did, our solicitor is very good.. Our previous house was in this estate also and when we bought it, they actually offered to extend the driveway for our then motorhome but we sold it in the meantime. When we asked about buying the VW Cali later, they said that it was ok but we insisted on it in writing having read the large 'rule book' that came with the house. But then when we sold our original house and bought this one on the same estate, they said we couldn't park it on our similar large driveway because we might encourage 'white van owners'. Very inconsistent, we can only conclude that the rest of the houses are not selling very quickly but as one of our neighbours said, 'if I saw the VW California in your driveway, I would be very impressed and it would encourage me to buy!!'

 

[Velma's Dad]

They did, our solicitor is very good.. Our previous house was in this estate also and when we bought it, they actually offered to extend the driveway for our then motorhome but we sold it in the meantime. When we asked about buying the VW Cali later, they said that it was ok but we insisted on it in writing having read the large 'rule book' that came with the house. But then when we sold our original house and bought this one on the same estate, they said we couldn't park it on our similar large driveway because we might encourage 'white van owners'. Very inconsistent, we can only conclude that the rest of the houses are not selling very quickly but as one of our neighbours said, 'if I saw the VW California in your driveway, I would be very impressed and it would encourage me to buy!!'

Wow. Sounds like they've been all over the place on this and they are quite possibly shooting from the hip without knowing what they can actually enforce in law. I presume the 'old' and 'new' houses actually have different covenant clauses?

I guess you'll just have to judge how likely they'd be to try to enforce it, but meanwhile if it was me I'd leave my Cali parked on the drive until they actually serve a formal notice.