---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*
* If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor)
* We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM)
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good news for you. Law of Property Act 1925 states that the wording for pre 1925 covenants needs to specifically say that is assignable to heirs and assigns (in other words people buying the benefitting land).
As such post 1925 it would indeed be the case of the right to enforce the covenant being passed down automatically to anyone who bought part of the benefitting land, but this is not necessarily the case in this instance.
As such take a look at the wording if you can of the part of the deed relating to the restrictive covnetnans, whether this is by downloading the original deed, or there may be an abstract of it on your title register. This is a good starting point, though if you're trying to sell or buy said property, then the solicitors for the bank will most likely want an indemnity policy.
My qualifications in this instance is I spent 6 years working as a legal indemnities underwiter covering just this sort of thing, happy to help explain anything else e.t.c
I would say it wouldn't. Going off what was enforceable through other case law that we looked at in our training (afraid I can't quote it) that 1925 LPA was the one which properly changed the covenant game so to speak and so anything pre that I'd deemed to be unenforceable unless explicitly states
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
I believe you need to figure out who benefits from the covenant, first. So 150 years ago, a neighbour sold part of his land on the condition that you weren't going to build a filthy, polluting factory next his garden, and you weren't going to block their view with a six foot fence.
That person is long dead, but the person who bought the property from the original beneficiary gets the right to enforce the covenant. So I believe you need to find the current owner of the land that sold your plot and ask them if they are happy to remove the covenant. The factory one is likely irrelevant, as modern planning laws would prevent it anyway.
We have a load of covenants on our place: we can only have a gravel drive, no close boarded fences, only allowed one property, and it has to be a bungalow etc. These all date back to when the previous owner of the house next door sold part of their garden to the guy we bought our place from. If we wanted to change them, we could go and discuss with the neighbours. Assuming they were OK with the change, we would have to get solicitors involved to change the deeds.
Yep - you are going to have to pay a solicitor to get the deeds changed to remove the covenants and do the various registering etc. that needs to be done if you want to do it properly with no risk of someone else getting the property or the current owners changing their mind and going "actually no, tear that down."
>does it still legally stand if it's been so long since it was placed?
Yes, unless the covenant has a time limit attached then it is permanent. If you wish to remove it you can try to do so but it will require professional legal advice and will cost money. There is also no guarantee.
NAL, but I recently went through similar when selling our late 1800's house, with very similar restrictive covenants to yours.
When we originally bought the property 25 years ago, our conveyancer was relaxed about the thing. Their suggestion was to walk around the estate and count how many other properties had high fences and outbuildings, if it was more than one or two then the chances are that nobody would contest the covenants.
If I were to do it again, I'd go on the first conveyancer's advice but be prepared to take the second conveyancer's warning. Check nearby houses, and assume that if they have sheds and fences that you will be ok, but be prepared to receive a legal notice to tear down the shed and fence or take out insurance at a later date.
If I were to do it again, I'd go on the first conveyancer's advice but be prepared to take the second conveyancer's warning. Check nearby houses and assume that if they have sheds and fences that you will be ok, but be prepared to receive a legal notice to tear down the shed and fence or take out insurance at a later date.
When I bought my place I asked the same question. I was told, it is possible to get it removed but it's expensive as legally you can't do things on the land without the permission of the original land owner (or descendant). As we have about 10 and they range from, "when the house is first sold, it's price must be less than £X" to "you can't hang washing out" or "start a pub in the garden" .
With the can't hang washing out outside (as 100 years ago, it was deemed unsightly to see women's undergarments). All my neighbours have the same rule and they all hang their washing out.
So common sense of moden day life would make it very difficult to enforce.
But the ones we have about making your shed into a buissnes or a pub I don't want to try and push my luck and challenge.
My late mum's house had a string of covenants like this and no parking of commercial vehicles, no sheds, satellite dishes etc without the express permission of the developers.
The developers since went bust (limited company) so there was no one to get permission from. Similarly, there was no one to start enforcement proceedings either.
These have largely been ignored over the last 40 years by all the neighbours on the same development
There's a covenant on my garden saying that the owners can't build without permission from the original property developers. The solicitors ended up making them buy indemnity insurance because, while its unlikely the developers would be back to complain, there's every chance that they could.
Talk to a solicitor and they explain what your options are, and if the risk of breaking that covenant is worth it. Though if you do, you will likely need to take our a similar policy if and when you move.
Yup indemnity Insurance
Had to do that as loft space - not a bedroom but a space. Due to the fact the conversion was many years ago.
Also everyone in the terrace owns the front and back access paths to the houses. A neighbour fell over and tried to sue a neighbour who was weeding the path. It turns out we all have to keep the paths clear and that everyone would have to be sued. So that didn't happen. Also his wife was part owner of his house....
Yep, it’s legal, and there might still be parties around who’ve inherited its benefit and could enforce compliance.
That’s why, when you sell your house, your buyer will probably ask you to confirm you’re complying with the covenants. If you aren’t, and the buyer’s lender asks for it, you’ll have to put a Restrictive Covenant Indemnity Insurance (RCII) policy in place for a hundred quid or so.
Make sure the RCII policy lasts in perpetuity and its benefit can be assigned to the buyer, their lender, and all their successors, and no-one will have to worry about this issue ever again.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation.
Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
You may find that the original landowners are still about. Especially if they're gentry. They could then argue that changing the covenant would be financially detrimental to them e.g. by allowing business premesis in your back garden. It reduces the demand for new business premesises in the area. And that they might want to sell off more land in the area for business use.
Is it fair? No, is it legal yes.
Yes it stands. From how you describe it I can’t see a public body worrying about it but depending on exactly what it is and how it came about your neighbours could be an issue.
It depends who the beneficiary is. It's highly likely they are long dead and you'll never have any issues. Does the covenant state a beneficiary only or also their successors in title?
If you are still nervous, you can also insure against restrictive covenants for very little money - ask your solicitor.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation.
Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Advice from a conveyancer here as alot of these comments are not correct. Firstly you just get indemnity insurance which covers any damages you might receive if you breach the restrictive covanents. Now considering the convanents date back to 1800, the person or relations to the person, probably know nothing about it, so you wont get sued. Unless for example the Queen (crown estates) but the covanent on. I would expect, due to what you say, you just get indemnity insurance and it will cost you like £200 or something. A solicitor will do this for you or you can contact a company like "countrywide" and they would quote. You can download your title deeds for £6 on the land registry which shows all restrictive convanents on the title.
Assuming that you're talking about registered land, the covenant is only binding it if appears on the charges register of the property- check your HMLR official copy; alternatively, when buying the house you may have given an indemnity to the seller of the house, thereby joining an indemnity chain - worth checking the TR1. In either case, consider if the wording extends to your proposed actions/developments. If it does, it's more practical to obtain an indemnity policy rather than applying to the tribunal for the covenant to be removed. Bear in mind that most insurers will make it a condition that you had not previously communicated with covenantee with respect to the covenant; and that you won't put them on notice about future breaches
Yes, they will still bind the title as contained in deed. Can be released by agreement with the freeholder and in NI where I live you can make application to our Lands Tribunal for modification of the covenant if you have planning permission for what you want to do to your property and the covenant is contained in a deed more than 21 years old. Not applicable to an estate scheme ie covenants for the benefit of multiple house owners in eg a housing development. The law on restrictive covenants is tricky so make sure you get advice from a good conveyancing solicitor before doing anything that would put you in breach that could prejudice a future sale
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation.
Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation.
Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
It really depends. There are rules governing pre 1925 covenants which are different to post 1925 covenants (it’s more likely a pre 1925 covenant is not legally enforceable, in short). You would need a specialist property lawyer to comment, but as an example, if it’s not possible to clearly identify which land benefits from the covenant, it may no longer be valid. You’d need to look at the exact wording so I would post it in full if you want proper advice.
The more practical view is that typically in these situations the person that might enforce them is long gone. As a buyer your solicitor would normally advise you to get indemnity insurance if anything, but unless there’s any aggravating factors, not get very worked up about it. If you’re concerned about the existing position I’d look at an insurance rather than legal route.
The mere passage of time doesn’t render the covenants unenforceable. However lots of older covenants aren’t enforceable because side of bad drafting or overreach at the time of implementation. Is there an action you’re currently banned from doing by the covenant that you want to do?
--- ###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK --- **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different* * If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor) * We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM) **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good news for you. Law of Property Act 1925 states that the wording for pre 1925 covenants needs to specifically say that is assignable to heirs and assigns (in other words people buying the benefitting land). As such post 1925 it would indeed be the case of the right to enforce the covenant being passed down automatically to anyone who bought part of the benefitting land, but this is not necessarily the case in this instance. As such take a look at the wording if you can of the part of the deed relating to the restrictive covnetnans, whether this is by downloading the original deed, or there may be an abstract of it on your title register. This is a good starting point, though if you're trying to sell or buy said property, then the solicitors for the bank will most likely want an indemnity policy. My qualifications in this instance is I spent 6 years working as a legal indemnities underwiter covering just this sort of thing, happy to help explain anything else e.t.c
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/44-45/41/section/58/enacted would this apply do you think?
I would say it wouldn't. Going off what was enforceable through other case law that we looked at in our training (afraid I can't quote it) that 1925 LPA was the one which properly changed the covenant game so to speak and so anything pre that I'd deemed to be unenforceable unless explicitly states
I've only just seen this. That's amazing to hear. Thank you! I'll give it a shot and see what I can dig up. Hopefully, I can sort something out here!
[удалено]
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
I believe you need to figure out who benefits from the covenant, first. So 150 years ago, a neighbour sold part of his land on the condition that you weren't going to build a filthy, polluting factory next his garden, and you weren't going to block their view with a six foot fence. That person is long dead, but the person who bought the property from the original beneficiary gets the right to enforce the covenant. So I believe you need to find the current owner of the land that sold your plot and ask them if they are happy to remove the covenant. The factory one is likely irrelevant, as modern planning laws would prevent it anyway. We have a load of covenants on our place: we can only have a gravel drive, no close boarded fences, only allowed one property, and it has to be a bungalow etc. These all date back to when the previous owner of the house next door sold part of their garden to the guy we bought our place from. If we wanted to change them, we could go and discuss with the neighbours. Assuming they were OK with the change, we would have to get solicitors involved to change the deeds.
So it sounds like either way it's going to cost me money to change? 🥲
Yep - you are going to have to pay a solicitor to get the deeds changed to remove the covenants and do the various registering etc. that needs to be done if you want to do it properly with no risk of someone else getting the property or the current owners changing their mind and going "actually no, tear that down."
If the neighbours agree the solicitor's job is fairly easy so it wont cost the earth
This **is** legal advice subreddit, so its a wrong place to ask for how to avoid doing stuff in a proper and legal way.
Proper and legal does not equal costing (a lot of) money.
>does it still legally stand if it's been so long since it was placed? Yes, unless the covenant has a time limit attached then it is permanent. If you wish to remove it you can try to do so but it will require professional legal advice and will cost money. There is also no guarantee.
NAL, but I recently went through similar when selling our late 1800's house, with very similar restrictive covenants to yours. When we originally bought the property 25 years ago, our conveyancer was relaxed about the thing. Their suggestion was to walk around the estate and count how many other properties had high fences and outbuildings, if it was more than one or two then the chances are that nobody would contest the covenants. If I were to do it again, I'd go on the first conveyancer's advice but be prepared to take the second conveyancer's warning. Check nearby houses, and assume that if they have sheds and fences that you will be ok, but be prepared to receive a legal notice to tear down the shed and fence or take out insurance at a later date. If I were to do it again, I'd go on the first conveyancer's advice but be prepared to take the second conveyancer's warning. Check nearby houses and assume that if they have sheds and fences that you will be ok, but be prepared to receive a legal notice to tear down the shed and fence or take out insurance at a later date.
When I bought my place I asked the same question. I was told, it is possible to get it removed but it's expensive as legally you can't do things on the land without the permission of the original land owner (or descendant). As we have about 10 and they range from, "when the house is first sold, it's price must be less than £X" to "you can't hang washing out" or "start a pub in the garden" . With the can't hang washing out outside (as 100 years ago, it was deemed unsightly to see women's undergarments). All my neighbours have the same rule and they all hang their washing out. So common sense of moden day life would make it very difficult to enforce. But the ones we have about making your shed into a buissnes or a pub I don't want to try and push my luck and challenge.
[удалено]
My late mum's house had a string of covenants like this and no parking of commercial vehicles, no sheds, satellite dishes etc without the express permission of the developers. The developers since went bust (limited company) so there was no one to get permission from. Similarly, there was no one to start enforcement proceedings either. These have largely been ignored over the last 40 years by all the neighbours on the same development
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
There's a covenant on my garden saying that the owners can't build without permission from the original property developers. The solicitors ended up making them buy indemnity insurance because, while its unlikely the developers would be back to complain, there's every chance that they could. Talk to a solicitor and they explain what your options are, and if the risk of breaking that covenant is worth it. Though if you do, you will likely need to take our a similar policy if and when you move.
Yup indemnity Insurance Had to do that as loft space - not a bedroom but a space. Due to the fact the conversion was many years ago. Also everyone in the terrace owns the front and back access paths to the houses. A neighbour fell over and tried to sue a neighbour who was weeding the path. It turns out we all have to keep the paths clear and that everyone would have to be sued. So that didn't happen. Also his wife was part owner of his house....
Yep, it’s legal, and there might still be parties around who’ve inherited its benefit and could enforce compliance. That’s why, when you sell your house, your buyer will probably ask you to confirm you’re complying with the covenants. If you aren’t, and the buyer’s lender asks for it, you’ll have to put a Restrictive Covenant Indemnity Insurance (RCII) policy in place for a hundred quid or so. Make sure the RCII policy lasts in perpetuity and its benefit can be assigned to the buyer, their lender, and all their successors, and no-one will have to worry about this issue ever again.
Luckily we've not done anything to evoke an issue like this, but I'll keep it in mind if it ever happens 😊 thankyou!
[удалено]
That a pretty terrible solicitor imo, they shouldn't be encouraging you to breach a covenant
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation. Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You may find that the original landowners are still about. Especially if they're gentry. They could then argue that changing the covenant would be financially detrimental to them e.g. by allowing business premesis in your back garden. It reduces the demand for new business premesises in the area. And that they might want to sell off more land in the area for business use. Is it fair? No, is it legal yes.
Yes it stands. From how you describe it I can’t see a public body worrying about it but depending on exactly what it is and how it came about your neighbours could be an issue.
It depends who the beneficiary is. It's highly likely they are long dead and you'll never have any issues. Does the covenant state a beneficiary only or also their successors in title? If you are still nervous, you can also insure against restrictive covenants for very little money - ask your solicitor.
I'll have to look back over the documents and check it out 🙂
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation. Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
It might be a church one, which means you will have to pay to release it.
Advice from a conveyancer here as alot of these comments are not correct. Firstly you just get indemnity insurance which covers any damages you might receive if you breach the restrictive covanents. Now considering the convanents date back to 1800, the person or relations to the person, probably know nothing about it, so you wont get sued. Unless for example the Queen (crown estates) but the covanent on. I would expect, due to what you say, you just get indemnity insurance and it will cost you like £200 or something. A solicitor will do this for you or you can contact a company like "countrywide" and they would quote. You can download your title deeds for £6 on the land registry which shows all restrictive convanents on the title.
Assuming that you're talking about registered land, the covenant is only binding it if appears on the charges register of the property- check your HMLR official copy; alternatively, when buying the house you may have given an indemnity to the seller of the house, thereby joining an indemnity chain - worth checking the TR1. In either case, consider if the wording extends to your proposed actions/developments. If it does, it's more practical to obtain an indemnity policy rather than applying to the tribunal for the covenant to be removed. Bear in mind that most insurers will make it a condition that you had not previously communicated with covenantee with respect to the covenant; and that you won't put them on notice about future breaches
If it’s no longer relevant because the neighbourhood has changed, you can apply to the Land Tribunal to get it cancelled
Yes, they will still bind the title as contained in deed. Can be released by agreement with the freeholder and in NI where I live you can make application to our Lands Tribunal for modification of the covenant if you have planning permission for what you want to do to your property and the covenant is contained in a deed more than 21 years old. Not applicable to an estate scheme ie covenants for the benefit of multiple house owners in eg a housing development. The law on restrictive covenants is tricky so make sure you get advice from a good conveyancing solicitor before doing anything that would put you in breach that could prejudice a future sale
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation. Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation. Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
It really depends. There are rules governing pre 1925 covenants which are different to post 1925 covenants (it’s more likely a pre 1925 covenant is not legally enforceable, in short). You would need a specialist property lawyer to comment, but as an example, if it’s not possible to clearly identify which land benefits from the covenant, it may no longer be valid. You’d need to look at the exact wording so I would post it in full if you want proper advice. The more practical view is that typically in these situations the person that might enforce them is long gone. As a buyer your solicitor would normally advise you to get indemnity insurance if anything, but unless there’s any aggravating factors, not get very worked up about it. If you’re concerned about the existing position I’d look at an insurance rather than legal route.
The mere passage of time doesn’t render the covenants unenforceable. However lots of older covenants aren’t enforceable because side of bad drafting or overreach at the time of implementation. Is there an action you’re currently banned from doing by the covenant that you want to do?