The Landlords Union “Press Liaison” Questions HMO Minimum Room Size Impact Assessment

It is my understanding that the minimum room size requirement relates to the granting of a HMO licence, in which case does it even apply to to the 4 bed property you refer to, as that would not be licensable?

I have a 5 bed HMO where 1 room will be deemed too small for occupation. I bought the property and worked out the yield based on the 5 beds being let meaning the property is soon to be far less valuable. My only option is to evict all tenants, remove the unsightly fire alarm, emergency lighting and fire doors and sell to a family as that's the only market I could attract at market value.
It wouldn't stack up yield wise to an investor on an single AST and HMO investors will be now ruled out.
I've never struggled to let the room or keep tenants in - its always worked for everyone!

Reply to the comment left by Robert Mellors at 08/05/2018 - 14:03
Some areas have mandatory/additional licensing that captures all HMOs of any size.

Reply to the comment left by Joe Robertson at 08/05/2018 - 15:14
I had a beautiful Edwardian house that I let out in 1996 where I had to change all the wide doors to fire doors, fit wash basins in every room, fire alarm system, etc. where at the time Croydon Council was operating the HMO scheme.
It all worked out well until around 2006 after which the regulations seemed to just increase, along with the work load. Anyway, I thought being an HMO which met all the regulations, I would get a much better price having had to have applied for planning permission and the rest of the work to bring to the standard for rental purposes however, a few agents that viewed the property said that it would fetch a much lower price as there weren't many investors looking for such properties and it would only suit large families. Many original features had also been ruined such as the replacement of the doors with fire doors, wash basin in lounge, etc.
Anyway, I sold up as it was all too much unnecessary work and now I am stuck with all my properties licensed which once again has increased the workload unnecessarily.
I recently have had an officer from the council write to me and tell me that the one bed I am renting to a mother and child is overcrowding although, it easily meets the space standard. I had pointed this out to the officer but he says there are new rules that have come out and councils have special powers to tackle overcrowding but I could not find them anywhere so am waiting for him to send me the regulation.

In Southwark, London where licensing is mandatory for HMO, and they deem this to be 3 or more people in 2 or more households, their minimum room sizes are 8m if there is a living room, and 10m if there is not. I have no living room there and so the room at 8.61m was too small. They said to me that they wanted the room to be permanently unoccupied. They were not interested in the loss of a room (occupied happily for years) nor the fact that the other rooms would be more expensive, as in a comment above, there would be a living room. I took them to tribunal, and before this a mediation was arranged with the council. We met at the flat and after 3 weeks they gave in, I guess because they would loose at tribunal... It is the people at the bottom who would suffer, but most of these regulations are by people who do not have a clue about the impact of what they are doing

We need to accumulate instances ( short stories ) where Landlords have to evict a Tenant from a bedroom under 6.51 sq/ M. and also capture the resultant rent increases. It goes without saying that Landlords should be explaining the 'enforced' provision of the legislation on them to their tenants and should not be 'taking the fall' for this legislation.
Please post your examples of the effect of this.

Reply to the comment left by Robert Mellors at 08/05/2018 - 14:03Yes Robert, it was in a licensed area so affects less than 5 occupants as Luke points out.

Reply to the comment left by Ross Tulloch at 08/05/2018 - 16:45I think Southwark's standards illustrate the real danger of the government's latest reforms; namely the apparently open-ended ability the government has given to councils to go above 6.1 sq meters in their area. In my area, Cambridge, the council are proposing to stick with 6.1 sq m unless there is no communal space, in which case it goes to 7.1 sq m. There is going to be a bonkers variation around the country, making HMO planning/future-proofing by landlords very difficult. For example, suppose you invested a lot of money meeting the specification for your area, then there is a local election and another political party get in and want to make the minimum space standard bigger? Your whole business model could be totally shafted over night (unless you make all your rooms great big doubles). At least with central government, things usually need legislation and so tend, in practice, to be more stable. Left to local councils, change will be an ever-present risk.

Southwark do not want to evict anyone. So an existing tenant can stay as long as they want. But you cannot replace them. So the quiet reduction of available rooms and increase in rent will not be seen as their fault.

Can anyone point to anything this government has done which has eased the housing situation, anything which has made more property available to rent or buy? I cannot think of anything so I am genuinely interested in the views of others.