Minimum size for a one bed flat

Bogof_Babe

Someone on Homes Under the Hammer today said that a one bed flat has to be a minimum of 40 square metres in size.

I have a flat in a Victorian conversion that I'm pretty sure doesn't have that amount of floor space, it is short by about five square metres. The overall layout is a square, so it's not too hard to calculate.

I bought it eight years ago as a cash buyer. Is it now unsaleable, or worse than that, illegal?

I use it as a second home/base, so it isn't rented out, and it is perfectly adequate for my purposes.

lincroft1710

I'm a very charitable person and as you have now have a completely unsaleable property would generously offer you £5,000 for it

maisie_cat

I would have thought that any minimum standards would apply to new build or conversion only. There will always be a market for tiny flats & even if hard to mortgage there will always be cash buyers.

eddddy

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Someone on Homes Under the Hammer today said that a one bed flat has to be a minimum of 40 square metres in size.

Were they talking about planning/development control standards?

If so, that specific planning authority won't grant new planning consents for one bed flats of less than 40 sq mtrs.

- Those standards can change over time (the limit may have been, say, 30 sq mtrs 8 years ago)
- Those standards vary by planning authority

Your flat would have been granted planning consent based on the standards at the time. Consent cannot be revoked now.

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

I bought it eight years ago as a cash buyer. Is it now unsaleable, or worse than that, illegal?

Some mortgage lenders won't lend on a studio, and those that do won't lend on one under 30 sq mtrs. So some might also be concerned about a small 1 bed flat.

But even if a mortgage is a problem, you can still sell to other cash buyers.

Bogof_Babe

Thanks for the replies, especially yours eddddy.

The building was converted in 1986 into six flats, mine being the smallest, and a 999 year lease runs from that date. I'm not thinking of selling any time soon, but obviously at some point it will have to be put on the market.

Relieved to know it was acceptable at the time, and they presumably can't back-track on the regulations.

I can't understand why it wouldn't be perfectly adequate for a single person. It is a bit cramped when my husband (rarely) stays there with me, but a young couple would manage for a while I'm sure. It has a separate kitchen and isn't a studio, the bedroom fits a double bed and a couple of fitted wardrobes, so it works well. The bathroom and lounge are quite a decent size for the type of property, and there is a central vestibule area (big enough for a table and chairs) that all the rooms are off, so the layout is good.

lincroft1710

Came across many tiny flats in the 1980s/90s, as well as 1 bed "cluster homes" most still in existence. The cluster homes were new/very recent build at the time and had less than 40 sq m of accom.

G_M

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2804826/Well-s-definitely-cosy-Britain-s-tiniest-home-sells-275-000-despite-200-feet-square.html

theartfullodger

Overcrowding law (Housing Act 1985 Part X ..)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/68/part/X
- which DOES apply to owner-occupiers, see s327 - gives minimum bedroom sizes and that would apply. But, for example, this gives..

Floor area
The minimum floor area considered enough for your family is:

50 - 69 square feet (4.6 - 6.5 square metres) for 0.5 people
70 - 89 square feet (6.5 - 8.4 square metres) for 1 person
90 - 109 square feet (8.4 -10 square metres) for 1.5 people
110 square feet (10.2 square metres) for 2 people

- way, way lower than 40 sq mtrs or even 200 sq ft.

[Deleted User]

I guess it doesn't apply to homeless people when they stick a family of five in a room (even if a child = 0.5 people).

PasturesNew

deannatrois wrote: »

I guess it doesn't apply to homeless people when they stick a family of five in a room (even if a child = 0.5 people).

It doesn't work like that.

Putting homeless people into one room = stopping them from sleeping on the streets while/until the "right sized" property becomes available to them to move into.

Different thing altogether.

If whoever "put" them into the room HAD something of a suitable size they'd have been put there instead. A room isn't some arbitrary punishment, or illegal activity, it's a response to an immediate and urgent need. They can't magic up the right sized properties on a whim.

theartfullodger

Such housing can still be challenged on the basis of "unsuitability": But the reality is, it happens, wrong, but it does. Part 7 Housing Act 1996 I think..
e.g.
http://lexisweb.co.uk/cases/2001/june/ron-the-application-of-khan-v-newham-london-borough-council
&
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/2008/12/refusing-temporary-accommodation/