The original covenant date 1977 states that:"The following restrictions and protective covenants are hereby imposed by the undersigned on that certain forty-four acres containing three tracts. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all parties and persons claiming under them until July 1, 1984. After which time said covenants shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten years unless, by a vote of the then owners of majority of said tracts, it is agreed to change said covenants in whole or in part. "
The previous owner told me that since they own 26 acre they managed to release the convent of their 26 acre without telling other owners. This is recorded at Spartanburg County. Is this legal? The 3 neighbors don't think so as they never had a vote.
Avvo is not a good forum for the type of question you seek guidance for. You're going to need to have a local NC property attorney review the Deed and all its restrictons, in conjunciton with the subsequent purchases, to determine the provision applicability to you now. Sounds like lawyer mumbo-jumbo I know, but that is the best way for you to proceed.
READ THIS BEFORE CALLING OR EMAILING ME: I am licensed to practice before the state and federal courts in Virginia. We have not established an attorney-client relationship unless we have a signed representation agreement and you have paid me. I am providing educational instruction only--not legal advice. You should speak with an attorney to whom you have provided all the facts, before you take steps that may impact your legal rights. I am not obligated to answer subsequent emails or phone calls unless you have hired me. I wish you the best of luck with your situation.
3 lawyers agree
Construction / Development Lawyer
You should review this with an attorney who can verify your existing title. It sounds plausible that the previous owners could have done as they said as they owned over a majority of the acres, but was this properly recorded and executed? Also does tracks of land necessarily correlate to acres in this case, or does it relate to platted lots which could be different.
1 lawyer agrees