We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
landlords - do they legally have to provide smoke alarms?
Comments
-
That is not completly right, normall properties before 1992 do not need smoke dectectors but properties built after june 1992 must have main, interlinked smoke detectors on each floor. The landlord should ensure that the detectors are working at the start of the tenancy.
If it was not working and a tenant was killed or maimed in a fire the landlord could be sued for negligence.
Just to add to that (I have read Building Regs parts B & P), they do need to add them though if the house is converted, extended, or subject to material alteration (loft/cellar conversion).
So if it was already wrong when building regs came in, you don't have to do anything. However if you do anything fundamental to the property you have to correct the defects. Otherwise when building regs where introduced the whole country would have had to be corrected at once!
However it does sound like yours is a HMO, and therefore needs to comply with the new laws that came in next year. They need smoke alarms in all the main rooms and corridoor wired to the lighting curcuit. Your landlord may be unaware of all this though.0 -
However it does sound like yours is a HMO, and therefore needs to comply with the new laws that came in next year. They need smoke alarms in all the main rooms and corridoor wired to the lighting curcuit. Your landlord may be unaware of all this though.
I agree that this does sound like a HMO but I'm not sure what you mean by, "the new laws that came in next year." If there is a law coming in next year why would you need to comply with it now? What law are you referring to? You seem to be applying the building regs legislation when what you should be doing is applying the HMO regs. If the HMO requirements apply (and they probably do but at the moment we can't be completely sure) then the alarm you are specifying is more than what's required for a 2 storey house but falls a long way short of what will be required for 3 or more storeys.0 -
I agree that this does sound like a HMO but I'm not sure what you mean by, "the new laws that came in next year." If there is a law coming in next year why would you need to comply with it now? What law are you referring to? You seem to be applying the building regs legislation when what you should be doing is applying the HMO regs. If the HMO requirements apply (and they probably do but at the moment we can't be completely sure) then the alarm you are specifying is more than what's required for a 2 storey house but falls a long way short of what will be required for 3 or more storeys.
Sorry, I meant LAST year.
Building regs apply to ALL properties, but there are some Acts that supercede them in some instances. E.g. HMO legislation in the 2004 Housing Act
http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/rentingandletting/privaterenting/housesmultiple/whatis/
I wasn't trying to detail HMO requirements in full, simply answering the original question about whether there should be be smoke alarms or not.0 -
from the list of definitions of HMOS on the above site : -
""A building which is converted entirely into self-contained flats if the conversion did not meet the standards of the 1991 Building Regulations and more than one-third of the flats are let on short-term tenancies."
People mistakenly think that the most important HMO definition is about storeys - - its not - the first criteria for a HMO is about "Households" - ie families/indviduals living together - ie how many people who are/are not related to each other live in the same property. One family regardless of size, is one household. So a man, wife and 10 kids = one household - and they are NOT subject to HMO regs regardless of how many storeys they live in. Whereas 12 individuals living in the same property = HMO and has to be licensed and full compliant with the 2004 Housing Act which includes hardwired smoke alarms.
If a HMO property is 3 storeys or more, then much more onerous requirements apply - such as fire doors throughout the whole property. A complex matter.0 -
Oh and if the council visit any house and do a HHSRS rating on the fire risk, which is not satisfactory, they can make owner put an alarm in whether it's a HMO or not. So landlords of non HMOs may not have an automatic legal obligation to fit alarms, but if the council tells them to do so then they must comply (or appeal, etc.).
That is exactly what Hove Council did after the high profile fire in a HMO in 1992
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article186201.ece
http://archive.theargus.co.uk/2002/7/29/153292.html
Because of the height of the building and no fire alarms or fire escapes several people died.
I assume that the building regs were changed in 1992 to stop this from happening in new conversions but representatives of the Environmental Health Dept of Hove Council visited every building which they considered a HMO, including those which were converted into self-contained flats, and served them under Section 352 of the Housing Act 1985 requiring them to have fire detection systems fitted, they got around to us in 1996. It was a policy local just to Hove (and Brighton perhaps) not a national policy I believe.
We also received a grant from the council to help pay for it, those were the days.:D0 -
People mistakenly think that the most important HMO definition is about storeys - - its not - the first criteria for a HMO is about "Households" - ie families/indviduals living together - ie how many people who are/are not related to each other live in the same property. One family regardless of size, is one household. So a man, wife and 10 kids = one household - and they are NOT subject to HMO regs regardless of how many storeys they live in. Whereas 12 individuals living in the same property = HMO and has to be licensed and full compliant with the 2004 Housing Act which includes hardwired smoke alarms.
If a HMO property is 3 storeys or more, then much more onerous requirements apply - such as fire doors throughout the whole property. A complex matter.
I think most people (who need to know) understand that the definition of HMO itself is primarily about households, although other factors do come into play. How you apply the rules is certainly more about number of storeys and occupants. To say that a rented property housing twelve individuals equals a HMO and must be licensed is not always true. I've come across several houses with 12 individuals or more which are not mandatory licensable because they are only two storeys. So number of storeys is pretty important in those cases I'd say.
I also know of one shared house which contains 10 tenants and is five storeys tall. Only six of the tenants are related by marriage or blood and two are not related at all, yet the house is not licensable nor is it even a HMO.
So yes, households are important but the other stuff is equally as important.0 -
yet more confusing advice - National landlords association have been trying to get HMO info across to folks for the last 3 years
If you have at least 5 unrelated tenants (you can be related by common law relationships as well as marriage) and it is only on 2 storeys, it will be a HMO but will not be compulsorily licensable - HOWEVER it will be subject to management regulations and inspections under HHSRS.
In addition - local authorities will have the right to introduce additional compulsory licensing ("Selective Licensing") for any type of HMO in their area which is not covered by the mandatory scheme.
In other words, local authorities have the option to make you buy a license if they consult locally and then they can enforce compulsion on other properties which are not currently compulsorily licensed.
TJ27 you are right in one thing - i missed a bit out ""Whereas 12 individuals living in the same property of 3 storeys or more = HMO" thanks for pointing that out0 -
yet more confusing advice
That is exactly the problem clutton, it is becoming to confusing not just for landlords but also for local councils. I am sure TJ is the same with his authority that just to deal with HMO's it is becoming a full time occupation, whereas it was only 'part time' of an EHO's duties.
You have HMO licensing, the definition then changes if a resident landlord is present. Most people think they just understand the HMO definition itself and up pops 2 persons in 2 households is 'still a HMO' if a notice under part 1 (HHSRS) is issued.
Its mad!:eek:0 -
i know its crazy - i have been reading and researching HMOs since 2003, and keeping track of the discussions. The original 2004 act was very very clear in its definition of what was, and what was not a HMO. It is still very clear. Its only since implementation in April last year that various local authorities have "interpreted" the law to suit themselves, that it has all become terribly complex and unpredictable.
The "Selective Licensing" as i referred to in my last post will be the next taxatoin to dump itself onto private landlords. Manchester City council has "Selected" 3 (maybe 4?) run down boroughs for "Selective licensing" of ALL privately tenanted property. Its a fabulous money making machine for the city council - £450 a pop for each property - and the admin you have to do to get a license is truly awesome - not be mention having to be police checked and comply with 35 individual conditions which you dont get told about till AFTER you have bought the license !!!!!
of course none of these conditions apply to housing association/council property !!!!
sorry, must get off hobby horse !!!0 -
I agree. It is confusing and sometimes the amount of paperwork and information that is required is way OTT. We do sometimes have to think very hard when deciding whether a house is a HMO and whether it's licensable. Sometimes things are not clear cut but to be fair I think that the new definition is far better than the old one.
I think there are a few areas where selective licensing is being used but to be honest, I think most larger authorities have got plenty to get on with dealing with mandatory stuff. These are the higher risk properties and it makes sense to improve these first.
Licensing though is anything but the money maker you might think it is, and for the very reason you state, the admin and the work involved is demanding. Our fee is currently £410 per property but this is not a figure which we could just pick at random. We had to demonstrate to central government that our fees would not exceed our costs before they were set. And remember that a licence does (usually) last for 5 years.
I think the police checks are a very good thing, both for tenants and also the good landlords. We have come across landlords with current convictions for GBH, child molestation, serious fraud and a whole host of other things. Without the police check we would never have known. Surely it has got to be good for tenants that these landlords cannot get licences? And we do seem to be driving this type of landlord out of business. Many of them have just sold up. Surely this has got to be good thing for both tenants and other landlords? They do only cost £20 and that's a one off payment per landlord, not per property. Good value if you ask me.
If the property is up to the minimum legal standard in the first place there should be virtually no conditions to comply with. Well, OK there may be issues regarding washing facilities which may seem a little unfair to some. Our own generic conditions are quite demanding to be honest, but they are all taken from current legislation and should be complied with whether a licence is required or not. You will find most of our licence conditions in the HMO Management Regs but most landlords I come across have no clue what their obligations are in this respect. I make no apologies for reminding them via licence conditions.
HMO regulations most certainly DO apply to housing association properties but not licensing. We served one of our local HAs with a heap of improvement notices not too long ago. It caused them huge problems but HA properties should really be up to standard in the first place really. They should know better.
(Sorry to OP for going way off the thread by the way!!)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 355.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 456.2K Spending & Discounts
- 248.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 605.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 179K Life & Family
- 263.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards