Landlord doesn't have license?

Elsterap

I am renting a bedsit in a halls of residence which used to be for students but is now open to anyone.

The secretary of the halls was laid off recently and in place the recently acquired owner took her job. This is just something i've heard through the grapevine, but someone said that she held the license of this place and the landlord has been charging us rent illegally for the past two months?

Recently there have been surveyors looking at the place, i don;t know if that means anything?

Could any of this be true?

clutton_2

if you are talking about a HMO license or a Selective License then the license is for a specifically named individual who has responsibility for management . if that person leaves the job, then another must apply for the license.

chappers

If it still is part of a college then the rules are different not sure what happens when it ceases to be part of the college though.

TJ27

Mandatory licensing will apply if the place is three or more storeys, has five or more occupants and is not split into flats. It might also apply to other houses. Registered social landlords are exempt.

When you say "bedsit", is there any sharing of facilities? If your bathroom and cooking facilities are behind one door and for your use only, then it's probably classed as a flat and is not licensable.

If it's currently in private ownership then the "person having control" should apply for the licence. This is usually the owner or one of the joint owners of the property. Generally it must not be the manager, although sometimes it may be. It's very unlikely that the secretary of the halls would be the licence holder.

Under certain circumstances you are able to reclaim your rent, probably from the time you moved in. I don't know much about the financial side but I believe that if your landlord is actually prosecuted for not having a licence, you can get a rental repayment order.

Edit: Oh, and it's easy to find out if a house is licensed or not. Your council is legally obliged to hold a register of licensed properties, which you are entitled to look at. Phone up and ask them. In most cases they will just tell you over the phone.

Oh, and something else, if ownership has changed the new landlord will have to apply for a new licence. They are not transferrable.

clutton_2

""Mandatory licensing will apply if the place is three or more storeys,"" - or

if it is in an area which the local authority has taken up its Selective Powers to license ALL properties in a particular area - for example Manchester started off with forcing all landlords in 4 district to buy a license - they have now added another 6 (?) districts - more aggro and £500 for a license for landlords to contend with.....

TJ27

clutton wrote: »

""Mandatory licensing will apply if the place is three or more storeys,"" - or

if it is in an area which the local authority has taken up its Selective Powers to license ALL properties in a particular area - for example Manchester started off with forcing all landlords in 4 district to buy a license - they have now added another 6 (?) districts - more aggro and £500 for a license for landlords to contend with.....

Yup. That'll be selective licensing rather than mandatory though. Are you sure it's all landlords and all properties? Just privately rented HMOs surely?

I'm a little bit surprised that large councils are bothering with selective licensing at this stage. I suppose they must have their reasons though. Where I am we've got plenty of mandatory applicants to deal with. As these are the highest risk houses, it seems sensible to deal with these before using selective powers.

£500 is higher than here but believe me, it ain't no money spinner for the councils. Their reasons for applying selective licensing are unlikely to be financially motivated. Remember that the licence (usually) lasts for five years. So that's, what, nine quid per month per property? What's that as a percentage of the rental income on a five, six, seven or eight let? And we're now seeing evidence that grotty landlords are being forced out of the game because of licensing. Surely that's a benefit for good landlords and also tenants?

You're right though, it is another cost and it can be aggro. To be fair, licensing isn't usually huge aggro if the house is up to the minimum legal standard in the first place. As far as the property is concerned, licensing only goes slightly above that standard. For many landlords, it's proving that they are "fit and proper" that causes most problems.