Told we can't rent 3-bed house because it's not a HMO

kmb500

Hello

Me & my 2 friends want to move out from our parents and live together. We have been looking for 3-bed rentals. We viewed a house last week and sent an application form to the estate agent. The estate agent told me today that "the house is not suitable for 3 adults". I asked him what he meant and he said that the house would need to be an House of Multiple Occupancy and conform to regulations as it would be considered 3 properties. This does not sound right to me. I have previously lived in an HMO which was a 6-bed house with 6 separate tenancies, a proper "house share" - but this is nothing like that? We are just 3 guys who want to live together.

Is this correct? I can see on gov.uk that we would be considered "3 household" because we are not related. We want to be 1 household.... we spend all our time together as it is currently, we are not separate 'households' in our eyes...

https://www.gov.uk/private-renting/houses-in-multiple-occupation
But it says that while 3-family houses are considered HMOs, the HMO regulations only apply to 5+ household properties.

Is the estate agent correct? If so, is there anything we can do about it? For one thing we love this house. But more conceringly, if we are not allowed by law to rent somewhere that's not an HMO, is there any advice on how we live together? Because we live in a rural area and I can't imagine that there are many HMOs in the villages around us - and even less likely to be 3-bed HMOs, I would have thought.

Sorry for long post, appreciate all advice. THanks.

sammyjammy

I believe the rules differ by different council areas, check your local government website for local rules.

Slithery

kmb500 said:

Is this correct?

Depending on your local councils licensing regulations the EA could well be correct.

kmb500 said:

I can see on gov.uk that we would be considered "3 household" because we are not related. We want to be 1 household....

Two of you could get married and adopt the other one?

kmb500

Hm ok. Thank you.

Slithery said:

kmb500 said:

Is this correct?

Depending on your local councils licensing regulations the EA could well be correct.

kmb500 said:

I can see on gov.uk that we would be considered "3 household" because we are not related. We want to be 1 household....

Two of you could get married and adopt the other one?

My first thought was actually to tell them that 2 of us are in a relationship. But judging by the gov.uk site we'd still be "more than 1 household" in that case.

The other thing I've noticed is that all the regulations refer to "3 tenants", not "3 residents". What would happen if we re applied with only 2 tenants? Its surely possible for someone to live in a house without being a tenant. And then the HMO regulations wouldn't apply?

theartfullodger

Doesn't matter if it's joint tenancy or several room only ones.  You three would be a HMO - extra legal requirements.  Agent is correct.  Keep looking, someone will be happy.

Or two of you could be in a relationship then you'll only be 2 households so not a HMO...

MaryNB

theartfullodger said:

Doesn't matter if it's joint tenancy or several room only ones.  You three would be a HMO - extra legal requirements.  Agent is correct.  Keep looking, someone will be happy.

Or two of you could be in a relationship then you'll only be 2 households so not a HMO...

It would still be a HMO if they were down as a couple and an unrelated tenant because they'd be three people forming more than one household.

Spiderroo

In some areas three adults that aren’t related means you need a HMO license. It doesn’t matter if you see yourself as one household, that’s sometimes just the rules. I lived in a part of Bournemouth where that was the rule - when my landlord found out he put the tenancy in just my name but we already lived there so he didn’t want to lose his tenants. It’s technically not allowed so it’s a risk to take with new tenants and they may have other tenants interested who won’t require a HMO license. 

kmb500

The house (or any house in our area for 3 people) doesn't require a licence, but there's still some basic regulations. https://www.scambs.gov.uk/licensing/houses-in-multiple-occupation-hmo/

One of us, regardless of this, still intends to keep his "main" / "registered" residential address as his current family house (for various reasons that I wont go into).

So I'm wondering, if 2 of us were to be tenants and the 3rd person just "spends a lot of time" at the house, is this allowed? He would still be paying 1/3 of the rent/bills, but not technically living there. Or is this considered subletting, even though we wouldn't have any formal agreement with him?

I want to put myself in the best position for tomorrow when I call the agent back.

May seem like I am being fussy over this particular house, well I am as it's perfect, and we have only been interested in renting in this particular village (village of ~3,000 people, so theres not gonna be many, if any, set up HMOs)

diystarter7

Call the LA housing, they will give you clear info on the areas you are interested in. It's important to know that even in one town/borough the rules regarding renting change if the LA feels that a certain area is a rental hot-spot and a problem, they bring in licencing to even non HMO property rentals.. So check with the LA

MaryNB

kmb500 said:

The house (or any house in our area for 3 people) doesn't require a licence, but there's still some basic regulations. https://www.scambs.gov.uk/licensing/houses-in-multiple-occupation-hmo/

One of us, regardless of this, still intends to keep his "main" / "registered" residential address as his current family house (for various reasons that I wont go into).

So I'm wondering, if 2 of us were to be tenants and the 3rd person just "spends a lot of time" at the house, is this allowed? He would still be paying 1/3 of the rent/bills, but not technically living there. Or is this considered subletting, even though we wouldn't have any formal agreement with him?

I want to put myself in the best position for tomorrow when I call the agent back.

May seem like I am being fussy over this particular house, well I am as it's perfect, and we have only been interested in renting in this particular village (village of ~3,000 people, so theres not gonna be many, if any, set up HMOs)

If they pay you rent in exchange for accommodation it will be deemed a tenancy. 

Even if a licence isn't required the landlord may only have a standard BTL mortgage, not a specific one for HMOs so may not be able to let a HMO under their mortgage terms. I think HMOs that do not require a licence are still subject to additional requirements, above standard lets. 

dimbo61

3 or more unrelated is regarded as a small HMO and may require a licence and inspection by the local council HMO team.
A large HMO is 5+ unrelated tenants and WILL require a HMO Licence which costs over £1000 and requires certain room sizes, number of bathrooms, kitchen and lounge.
If a Landlord rents out a HMO without a licence the tenants can sue the LL and claim back all the rent they have paid.
Has the property got mains wired interlinked smoke alarms ? Fire blanket, fire extinguisher ???
Turn locks on exit doors.