Landlord does not have planning permission

catgirl2

I saw a flat for rent in Wanstead, Holywell House (or is it Hollywell?) in Wellington passage. It's a conversion from commercial lets. Haven't been able to contact the agent since it's the bank hols, but...

Then I did some looking on the council website. As far as I can tell he doesn't have planning permission, the council's planning policy seems pretty clear that he won't get it, I don't think he's even applied for it yet, and there is a complaint registered (with no outcome listed). Of course, I can't talk to the council until Tuesday.

Would it be a bad idea to become a tenant under these circumstances?

If I were to go ahead and become a tenant, and he does not get planning permission, what would be likely to happen? Would I be protected from eviction until the end of the contract? How does the council treat tenants in this sort of situation? Would the contract be valid even?

catgirl2

Oh dear, have I posted this in the wrong place? Can anybody help me?

rochja

Usually a landlord would have insurance including rehousing costs for a tenant when a property is un-occupiable. If the property were to become un-occupiable because the council required remedial works or change of use then the insurance should cover your re-homing costs for the remainder of the term of your contract. If the insurance were declared invalid due to say a failure by the landlord to declare material information [such as illegal change of use] then the legal obligation remains on your landlord. Trying ot get your legal rights when you face homelessness, however, is another matter. Why deliberately put yourself in such an invidious position? My advice is find something else

G_M

catgirl2 wrote: »

....... I don't think he's even applied for it yet, and there is a complaint registered (with no outcome listed).

Makes no sense. What is the compainant complaining about if no application has been made?!

If you were to move in, and the council were to take action about the use of the property for residential purposes, you would be forced to leave.

The LL may or may not have insurance, and it may or may not cover him.

You could, of course, sue him for breach of contract and claim damages (cost of emergency accomodation eg hotel), moving expenses, application fees for new rental etc), but it would take time and be a hastle.

See what council say on Tuesday and be prepared to walk away.

tim123456789

You need to explain "It's a conversion from commercial lets".

Arguably any professional LL is making "commercial" lets (even when what he is letting is residential property), but I guess you mean lets of commercial premises

What type of commercial premises, it will make a difference how easy it is to get (retrospective) change of use and/or the likelihood that it was mixed use in the first place

Fire_Fox

If it does not have planning permission does it have building regs? If it does not have building regs is it safe? Is it registered for council tax (probably not)? Can he get insurance? Why would you want to let from a landlord who has so little regard for the law?

tim123456789

Fire_Fox wrote: »

If it does not have planning permission does it have building regs? If it does not have building regs is it safe? Is it registered for council tax (probably not)? Can he get insurance? Why would you want to let from a landlord who has so little regard for the law?

Because very few tenants get a "free pick" as to what properties they rent.

You take whatever it is that suits your rent affordability, that meets your the size/location you require when, as and when it becomes available and worry about the "little" things afterwards. Because if you dither whilst sorting those out someone else will take it.


tim

GDB2222

Judging by my local authority (Barnet), it takes ages for them to get around to taking enforcement action. I've been trying to chivvy them along to take action against a local property, and they simply don't do anything.

Fire_Fox

tim123456789 wrote: »

Because very few tenants get a "free pick" as to what properties they rent.

You take whatever it is that suits your rent affordability, that meets your the size/location you require when, as and when it becomes available and worry about the "little" things afterwards. Because if you dither whilst sorting those out someone else will take it.


tim

I'd say regard for tenant safety and for the law are both pretty important attributes in a landlord!

tim123456789

Fire_Fox wrote: »

I'd say regard for tenant safety and for the law are both pretty important attributes in a landlord!

Firstly, I would suggest that the jump from LL not having PP for change of use to property being unsafe to habit is a pretty big one and not one that will apply in the majority of cases.

and secondly, whilst it may be obvious in this case [1] that he doesn't have change of use, this isn't always so and (as above) the delay in checking will often lose you the property

tim

[1] though until I get the answer to my first question, I would argue that it isn't even obvious in this case.