Suspected unlicensed HMO - advice please

AskAsk

You wouldn't be able to negotiate any rent refund from the landlord unless the court or the council issue a demand to him to pay you back the rent.  If he took it upon himself to give you any money, he could still be ordered to pay compensation if the council decides to take action.

The outcome will come out soon enough without you doing anything as he has now applied for the licence so it is in the council's hands.

sheramber

If your landlord has now applied fora licence it would seem he is well aware of the fact that he should have had a licence so you do not need to advise him of that.

theoretica

And remember that this is a check you may want to make before moving into a future property.

ThorOdinson

Give the OP a break. The LL is clearly not doing the right thing here, and aside from anything else if there are no consequences they will carry on breaking the rules.

I think pointing it out to them and seeing what their response is is quite reasonable. But maybe wait for the next government to see if they ban no-fault evictions first, in case they try to retaliate.

Bookworm105

ThorOdinson said:

Give the OP a break. The LL is clearly not doing the right thing here, and aside from anything else if there are no consequences they will carry on breaking the rules.

I think pointing it out to them and seeing what their response is is quite reasonable. But maybe wait for the next government to see if they ban no-fault evictions first, in case they try to retaliate.

the only motive driving OP's post is the potential sniff of money for themselves 
that does not give them any moral high ground 

Section62

ThorOdinson said:

Give the OP a break. The LL is clearly not doing the right thing here, and aside from anything else if there are no consequences they will carry on breaking the rules....

Are you saying the landlord now applying for the HMO licence isn't "doing the right thing"?

If a landlord is somehow punished when they realise their mistake and apply for the licence then that would act as a disincentive to them regularising the situation.  In various LA enforcement processes there is usually an opportunity for the 'offender' to put the situation right without facing a punitive sanction.  It is better to have the wrongdoer start doing things the right way, rather than have fear of punishment cause them to carry on doing it the wrong way in the hope nobody will ever find out.

The landlord is (apparently) applying for a licence, that is about as clear an indication they don't intend to "carry on breaking the rules" as you can get.

artyboy

Section62 said:

ThorOdinson said:

Give the OP a break. The LL is clearly not doing the right thing here, and aside from anything else if there are no consequences they will carry on breaking the rules....

Are you saying the landlord now applying for the HMO licence isn't "doing the right thing"?

If a landlord is somehow punished when they realise their mistake and apply for the licence then that would act as a disincentive to them regularising the situation.  In various LA enforcement processes there is usually an opportunity for the 'offender' to put the situation right without facing a punitive sanction.  It is better to have the wrongdoer start doing things the right way, rather than have fear of punishment cause them to carry on doing it the wrong way in the hope nobody will ever find out.

The landlord is (apparently) applying for a licence, that is about as clear an indication they don't intend to "carry on breaking the rules" as you can get.

There are no shortage of threads where tenants are egged on to pursue the LL for being late in protecting their deposit. It seems that the goodwill towards 'giving them a break' when they rectify a mistake applies selectively around here...

BarelySentientAI

artyboy said:

Section62 said:

ThorOdinson said:

Give the OP a break. The LL is clearly not doing the right thing here, and aside from anything else if there are no consequences they will carry on breaking the rules....

Are you saying the landlord now applying for the HMO licence isn't "doing the right thing"?

If a landlord is somehow punished when they realise their mistake and apply for the licence then that would act as a disincentive to them regularising the situation.  In various LA enforcement processes there is usually an opportunity for the 'offender' to put the situation right without facing a punitive sanction.  It is better to have the wrongdoer start doing things the right way, rather than have fear of punishment cause them to carry on doing it the wrong way in the hope nobody will ever find out.

The landlord is (apparently) applying for a licence, that is about as clear an indication they don't intend to "carry on breaking the rules" as you can get.

There are no shortage of threads where tenants are egged on to pursue the LL for being late in protecting their deposit. It seems that the goodwill towards 'giving them a break' when they rectify a mistake applies selectively around here...

There's a big difference between "apply for the statutory penalty that the law determines is suitable for the error" and "blackmail the landlord into repaying you nine month's rent".

saajan_12

Few leaps we're making.. 
Firstly, how do you know they have only just applied? If the letter was to let you know about an inspection or ask you some questions about who's living there, then those stages could be delayed from the initial application date - can be months from experience. Could also be a renewal as these are usually given for set periods. 

Secondly, how do you know the property itself fell below the requirements in any way? The licence is a piece of paper once certain criteria have been checked. However its not uncommon to do the actual build work to meet the criteria in one go when its vacant, and just leave the paperwork / fee until later. Lots of it is room sizes, number of kitchen / bathroom facilities, powerpoints at the right height, etc. Did you actually have a property that didn't meet the requirements, or are you looking to capitalise on a lack of paperwork? 

Depending on the above and if the LL is rectifying any gaps themselves unprompted, then the council may assess little / no penalty. As such, the LL would be unwilling to pay you off much, given they still have the risk of action by council. However it will be seen as retaliatory and I would expect a S21 to be on its way.. unlike a deposit penalty which is usually handled when you're out anyway, so have little to lose. 

In summary, check your facts first and be clear whether there were actually any physical problems or if it really is just blackmail on a lack of paperwork that didn't affect you anyway. That way you'll be able to guesstimate what the LL's response will be. 

ThisIsWeird

Section62 said:

ThorOdinson said:

Give the OP a break. The LL is clearly not doing the right thing here, and aside from anything else if there are no consequences they will carry on breaking the rules....

Are you saying the landlord now applying for the HMO licence isn't "doing the right thing"?

If a landlord is somehow punished when they realise their mistake and apply for the licence then that would act as a disincentive to them regularising the situation.  In various LA enforcement processes there is usually an opportunity for the 'offender' to put the situation right without facing a punitive sanction.  It is better to have the wrongdoer start doing things the right way, rather than have fear of punishment cause them to carry on doing it the wrong way in the hope nobody will ever find out.

The landlord is (apparently) applying for a licence, that is about as clear an indication they don't intend to "carry on breaking the rules" as you can get.

Absolutely.

And, I can offer an actual example.

A friend has (had) a house in Southwark that they rented out for a couple of decades. The rent was noticeably - significantly - below similar rates in the area, the house kept in good order, any issues addressed promptly, and the tenants were given a lot of leeway to do things their preferred way, such as finding and vetting replacement tenants, decorating to their own tastes, and stuff like that. In short, happy tenants, low turnover + instant replacements, and a happy LL too.

Then the owner had to sell so they could move away from the area. Tenants were genuinely disappointed at the loss, and some even sent letters acknowledging their 'luck' and 'thanks' over the past while.

Except one, from the most privileged professional background (unfortunately, both parents in 'law'), who saw fit to threaten to sue for a year's rent, because the LA had, around a year previously, reduced the tenant number that constituted 'HMO' from 5 to 4, gave no notice to LLs (unless you sought it out yourself), and introduced this change one ward at a time, and - you've guessed it - Southwark was the first, with other wards lagging behind by at least a year.

In other words, this change by the LA had absolutely zero bearing on the tenants, and as soon as the LL realised the change, he made the required application to declare it a 'HMO'. Nope, the ex-tenant is still threatening to sue.

Why? For no other reason than a sense of 'entitlement', and money. Because they think they can.

It's what such folk do.