'Just to follow on from my good friend Fartie, His Windyship understands that the covenants are put in there by the builders. If the builder is no longer in business it doesn't stand.'
----------------------
Sorry - but that is incorrect, absolutely, categorically, unequivocally, and definitely π
The developer may have instigated the restrictive covenant or he may have been implementing covenants that were on the land prior to him acquiring it. Either way, it makes no difference - the covenant is on the land, and cannot be removed It can usually be varied in your favour, however, by the developer. All developers retain that right to facilitate the progress of the work. If they wish they can modify the covenant prior to the purchase of the property, allowing a non-transferable exemption to the rule (which is what they did in our case) They can also grant such a waiver after the property is complete - if they are still in business, and if they are minded to do so.
If they have gone bust, then the covenant cannot be waived or varied by any other party - so, it would be best of the builder was still around and was decent enough to grant such a waiver. Sometimes they do - often they will not because (1) they have no interest in the matter (2) they don't want to get a reputation for varying covenants because that might adversely affect there sales prospects on future developments.
What's more, these covenants (unless varies in your favour) can be enforced by ANY party who is also subject to the terms - meaning (in the case of a housing development) a 'no caravan' covenant can be enforced by any person who owns a property on that development, even if his/her own property was a mile away from the offending caravan.
It sounds unfair, it can be unfair - but it is the law and if the matter were to go before a district Judge the plaintiff would win - absolutely no question about it. None.
Back in the real world, 99.999% of neighbours will have neither the inclination or the resources to instigate such an action BUT, if one does (and, sadly, people who know their rights are a growing tribe) the luckless caravan owner will find himself on a hiding to nothing if the caravan is being kept on ANY part of the property in contravention of a restrictive covenant.
Costs WILL be awarded against the loser - and there is no right of appeal, nor prospect of a successful outcome.
Sorry to be a Jonah - but that's the way it is.