Selective licensing: Minimum bedroom size?

Reply to the comment left by Rob Crawford at 12/01/2024 - 08:56
Who has the time, inclination or money?

Just get rid of the tenant and let the LA house them, if they want to be so clever.

So the flat is too small for somebody to rent, but presumably it's ok for an owner to live in it?

I wonder if the Renter's Reform Bill will retain a right for landlords to evict on the basis of arbitrary council rules?

Where there are no legal mandatory room size restrictions, local authority licensing room size limits are advisory, not legal requirements and can be negotiated.
It looks like this particular housing officer is making it up as they go along though.

Reply to the comment left by David at 14/01/2024 - 11:45
In a selective licence area the Councils can decide whether or not to issue a licence, so room sizes are effectively legal requirements.
The only issue that is likely to make councils reverse this decision is when tenants have to be evicted because a licence won't be granted, and properties have to be sold to owner/occupiers.

They're wrong about the Housing Act but if it's down to their own regulations for selective licensing, how big is the living room? If big enough to be a bedroom then just tell the council worker it's a studio flat with a separate office but the tenant can choose to use the office as a bedroom if they want!

Reply to the comment left by Jessie Jones at 14/01/2024 - 11:54
A refusal to issue a licence based on an advisory requirement can and should be challenged. Councils are likely to acquiesce where the have no lawful mandate to insist.

Reply to the comment left by Debra at 14/01/2024 - 14:01
agree - even under SL a lounge can be classed as a habitable room and therefore be used as a bedroom.

I had this exact same email conversation with someone in the housing dept in a SL council area. They themselves classed a lounge as a suitable to be used as a bedroom and due to the size told me how many people could sleep in here - referring themselves to the national legal standard.

It's slowly dawning that if they choose to impose their own stricter requirements over he national standards, then it means there will be families left draining their temp accommodation budget..

Ironic when room size /overcrowding is irrelevant/set aside when it comes to temp housing and they happily pack in a family of 4 or 5 in a one or two bed or split between hotel rooms....

forgot to add - if SL comes in after you have an AST then any council belief a bedroom is under their own size requirements can be disregarded as the tenants were already in situ and housed under the national guidelines. (same if the family then expanded).

If at the time of the AST you housed the right number of people per national occupancy then the day after you as a LL have no control 1. if they then breed like rabbits. They have made themselves overcrowded not the LL. 2. SL requirements ask for something else.

if the council limit the amount of people that can live in a property even if it is not an HMO then how do they expect to house anyone at all? What about all the afghans on the books now the hotels have been shut. Where have they gone? They are big families and need big houses. Families are trying to move in together to save costs but impossible to legally rent to them in certain selective licencing areas because the council have gone further than the legal occupancy standards?
So that same council are effectively discriminating against big families, yet they can't house them either.
Bonkers. Surely the MP of these areas need to be told what is happening here as this is overt discrimination?