HMO licence questions under caution?

If you search through the old Residential property tribunal cases you should find a precedent for a similar issue Preston Lancashire. Needless to say I won and recovered my costs would have been around 2008

Reply to the comment left by Mike at 13/02/2023 - 11:59
Of course it would be an HMO in the scenario you describe. Look up the definition and yes, two or more tenants offering accommodation to at least one Ukranian or any other refugee are HMOs.

Reply to the comment left by David at 15/02/2023 - 11:54
Yes it's an HMO, but that doesn't mean planning permission is required. If the bedrooms don't have locks on for example.

Further the council have overestimated the fire risk by a factor of 6 (indicated by the "fire seals" comment by the op). It's the same fire risk as if the friend was a blood relative.

So the op hasn't done anytime wrong, no need to buy out the tenant and no need to fill in this questionnaire. The council officer has not been trained correctly. No inference can be drawn from not filling in the four page form. If the council chases it all he has to do is ask the council for the statutory authority (the legislation) saying they can ask and he must answer. The wont be able to provide it because it doesn't exist.

Reply to the comment left by David Houghton at 13/02/2023 - 20:53Hello David,
Thank you for your thoughts.
I am in Bath where there is an article 4 directive/ direction...
Even though it's on a single agreement it is still a HMO I'm told.
I have been advised that I will not get planning permission as it would cause a HMO 'sandwich'.
I have applied for and had my HMO licencing inspection, which will be issued with only 2 conditions.
The questions under caution relate to operating a HMO without licence for the previous 6 months. I have a week left to respond.
One of the tenants has indicated that they would consider moving out with some help.
They would surrender their tenancy and I would issue a new one to the remaining 2 people at a lower rent of course.... so no longer a HMO or requiring planning....
Should I answer all the questions honestly and just put no comment under the ' DO YOU ADMIT THIS OFFENCE' question... I'm obviously guilty but will an admission trigger anything, or will a no comment just rile the solicitor?!!!
Anyone see any problems with this solution? Will they still fine me???
Thanks for everyone's interest, I've got a week left to respond....

Reply to the comment left by Chris @ Possession Friend at 13/02/2023 - 15:38
Hello Chris,

Yes I would like to discuss it please.

Can I email you directly?

Reply to the comment left by sarah Toth at 16/02/2023 - 10:06
Yes I agree it is an HMO. You can admit that. I do not accept,(that's code for it's not) that letting the property in this way constitutes development. If you were to put individual locks on the bedroom doors it would be different.

As I said council staff are not as well trained as they should be, nor as well trained as they think they are.

The way to deal with this is not answer their questions. My properties are in Preston. The council tax people still ask do I let furnished or unfurnished. I refuse to answer. I could it doesn't effect anything. They ask because it used to matter in '92 and it's on their form and they don't really know why. The rules on empty properties have changed since then

Anyway getting back to the point You need to ask them questions in writing and get their answers in writing.

Here's a bit of help. For the hhsrs guys. "I am a bit confused over your hhsrs fire risk assessment, I am struggling to understand why a blood relative as the third tenant would have a much lower risk assessment score than a friend, the tenants have exclude possession of the whole of the property on a joint and several basis. They are free to enter each others bedrooms as agreed between themselves, they do not cook or keep fridges in their rooms, the bedrooms don't have key operated locks on the doors . I respectfully suggest you have misinterpreted the hhsrs guidance and the fire risk is over estimated by a factor of 6. Could you get back to me at your earliest convenience "

In a separate letter to the planning department "I have been advised by your colleagues in the housing department that they consider letting a flat to a couple and their friend on a joint and several basis is development with respect to planning legislation. I am not sure if this is correct, if I retained possession of the communal areas and put locks on the bedroom doors I would of course feel differently. As I said not even a single screw has been fitted. If you consider this to be development, could you be kind enough to provide me with a reference to the relevant statute and section

Returning to the housing guy
"Thankyou for you questionaire. I am concerned that you may have exceeded you statutory powers and I don't really want to raise a formal complaint against you. Please could you confirm which statutory authorities you rely upon and confirmed in writing I am obliged by law to complete it"

This will trigger off the complaints process and someone better informed will deal with it.

So no need to fill in their form till they answer.

Incidentally the hhsrs steering group is part of Bristol council (or at least used to be ) just up the road from you

Reply to the comment left by sarah Toth at 16/02/2023 - 10:18
Just to be clear. You do need to apply for a licence if you haven't already done so.
(Part 3 housing act 2004)

Do not admit any offence.

Reply to the comment left by David Houghton at 15/02/2023 - 12:06
My reply to Mike above was on the scenario he outlined, not Sarah's. However, from the original post it would appear that Sarah is in breach of both planning and housing legislation by having neither planning consent, (article 4 area) nor a licence to operate an HMO. I think its very unhelpful to advise her that she has done nothing wrong and should not respond to the Council demand. A letter or interview under caution is the equivalent of the same with the Police and should be taken VERY seriously. As I said earlier, my strong recommendation would be for Sarah to get urgent legal advice from an HMO specialist solicitor.

Reply to the comment left by David at 16/02/2023 - 11:41
I do get what you're are saying. She could help herself by asking for a copy of the council's enforcement policy. It can be expected that this is to resolve the problems, i e. An unlicensed HMO, I think she has done that by applying for a licence so it's no longer a continuing offence. The planning I'm still not sure there has been development. If the council can show there has (I'm not sure there has) then she can offer to rectify by serving notice requiring possession. She can do this now she has applied for a licence. Thus remedying the planning breach. Councils don't usually prosecute if you are doing what they want.

Sarah just some extra points.

The licensing is a summary only offence under s127 of the mags Court act there's a 6 month window for prosecution starting the day you applied for the licence. It's counting do already, any delay works in your favour. It's unlikely they will prosecute when you are doing what they want anyway.

With regard to the planning breach, serve a s21 as soon as you can (4 months in usually) and tell the council you have complied with their implied request to rectify the planning breach, rather than waste their time on a planning app THEY have told you will be rejected anyway. That will kill of any action on the planning issue.

Should anyone else be in the same circumstances it's better to apply for a temporary exemption to licensing so you can serve s21. They may refuse, but a first tier property tribunal won't and you get your costs back of them