we now need planning for hmo

[john carling]

we have just been issued a planning enforcement.i will quote from the letter
" The matters which appear to constitute the breach of planning control.
Without planning permission, change of use of the building on the land from a single dwelling house to a house in multiple occupation."
this i feel has far reaching problems we were told by planning that they have nothing to do with hmos but it looks like things have changed if people complain then they do become involved.this i feel could turn into a long legal battle for us, and we only have a month to say we appeal.
if there is any help out there i be very helpfull, this i feel is one of those situations where if i dont appeal and win then it will spread around the country and effect all property that has multiple people and it does not matter if they are hmos as planning dont see hmos as 3 floors etc we have already had notification on a flat i have there were 4 people in there. thankyou for reading john carlin

[Editor]

John, I think you may have misunderstood the procedures: when planning said they have nothing to do with HMOs what they probably meant was that they have nothing to do with licensing and health & safety for HMOs - this comes under environmental health and to some extent building control and the local fire officer.
However, in reality they do have something to do with HMOs, as they do with any building: first they are concerned about the use of a building and secondly building control is concerned about building regulations.
The starting point before you do any conversion or change of use is planning. Can you get planning permission?
HMOs are contentious because neighbours don't like them and they can quickly bring down an area, so planning permission would not necessarily be automatic or straightforward.
Then you check with building control about proposed alterations (you will need to have detailed plans drawn up for your proposed works - it's always best to consult the planners and building inspectors first for an opinion and approval in principle before going to a lot of expense.
Finally, in the case of HMOs, check with envirnomental health.
To get a license you have to show that you are a fit and proper person to manage one of these properties, or otherwise you must use an agent.
One of the advertisers (HMOServices.com) on LandlordZONE offers consultancy services for HMO - See Directory > HMOs - http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/dir/hmo.htm
Sounds like you could do with some advice and support here.

[john carling]

hi editor thanks for replying , i have done some work on the property i made 2 large rooms into 4 good size doubles with ensuite but no structure or extension work.planning had a look at the property and in writing said it was not a planning problem and planning was not needed.that was a year ago.Now they they saying
""reason for issuing this notice. It appears to the council that the above breach of planning control has occured within the last ten years. The current use of the building has caused substantial harm to the amenities of occupiers of nearby houses because of noise disturbance, increases in refuse storage and increase coming and going, generated by the residents with associated traffic movements and car parking. Residents are also concerned at the impact on the character of the area which otherwise characterised by houses occupied by families. The development is contrary to the provisions of policies sdp1, sdp7, sdp9, and h4 of the city local plan . The council do not consider that planning permission should be given, because planning conditions could not overcome these objections""
The reason given like refuse etc have all been exaggerated by certain people but we have to prove it!!
As far as hmo department it prity much done they been around we have paid for licence we are just waiting for them to tell us what we need, and seems to be only couple of things upgrade of fire alarm and some felt around the fire doors.
i hope this gives you a clearer acount of the situation.thanks for replying your imput all helps ,,john

[philip benham]

seems to be a grey area, I wonder if the house was let with one contract to more than two (unrelated) people jointly paying rent if that would require planning. If so, surely that would mean every house in the country that has more than two unrelated people needs to have planning permission to be an HMO.

[john carling]

hi philip. i have spoken to head of planning and it seems that a single contract does not make it a single residence the issue it is if they are living as one!!the exact word planning used was " hobby " meaning if they do things togethere. You are right about every house in the country as i feel this is setting a presidence this is why i looking for help it such a grey area with large implications if we do not appeall.we have a neighbour that has pushed the wording to the limit and beyond!!.and he has given unhappy neighbours around the country a formula for removing hmos/multiple contracts. i feel in summary that if somone now complains about a house with people in it then planning is an issue , and to clear anothere point we did not increase the number of people living in the house it was a large 4 double bedroomed house before and we had max of six people and untill they found out that nothing would be done unless there was complaints/concerns we had no complaints or concerns...thankyou for your feedback and questions i think it helped to clear a few points. its daft but i think we can still put house full of students in there!!!!

[philip benham]

The "hobby" criteria sounds a bit flimsy. I live with a wife and three teenagers and we've all got wildly differing hobbies!! thank god :)
you say you had it let to up to six people before the recent improvements, were those people a family or was it a HMO? If it was an HMO for more than ten years you could be immune from enforcement action under the Ten Year Rule.
I have never let to students, have you been advised that if you let to students you will not need planning for an HMO?

[john carling]

hi hobby is flimsy but it the word he used and this is the problem a lot of the time it all vague and ripe for interpretation solicitors must love it..i done the improvements before i rented it out to single people. as far as the students yes i was told i not need planning it becasue they have a common interest/hobby. if they go out togeher for drink somthing like that it ok.

[philip benham]

If it is occupied by students it is still an HMO (category B). Perhaps you should ask why a category A HMO requires planning permission and a category B HMO does not.
Perhaps the council will be able to supply written proof that category A requires planning and that category B doesn't.
Perhaps you should get all the addresses of all the HMO's in your council area. The licensed ones should be listed at the council offices. Phone every newspaper ad that advertises a room and get the address. Perhaps you should complain about each and every one of them that doesn't have planning consent to be an HMO. You should be able to check if they have planning permission through the local council planning online. Then see what action the council takes. Life, after all, is a cabaret. :)

[red40]

John I dont suppose you had it in writing the first time you called when they said planning isn't needed. What about building control have they been involved with your conversion?

[john carling]

hi red yes i have it in writing twice that i not need planning the first time they confirmed that they knew it was single lets then the second time they went around to confirm everything again and still we not need planning.
building control were involved because they were asked to by neighbour they had no problems as it was only partition walls.thanks for the questions keep them comming i think you all getting the picture. what i had was a house that every council department was happy with then through neighbours getting together they have forced the council into issuing this enforcment...keep the questions comming ..many thanks john

[john carling]

The matters which appear to constitute the breach of planning control.
Without planning permission, change of use of the building on the land from a single dwelling house to a house in multiple occupation.
Reason for issuing this notice. It appears to the council that the above breach of planning control has occured within the last ten years. The current use of the building has caused substantial harm to the amenities of occupiers of nearby houses because of noise disturbance, increases in refuse storage and increase coming and going, generated by the residents with associated traffic movements and car parking. Residents are also concerned at the impact on the character of the area which otherwise characterised by houses occupied by families. The development is contrary to the provisions of policies sdp1, sdp7, sdp9, and h4 of the city local plan . The council do not consider that planning permission should be given, because planning conditions could not overcome these objections.

[philip benham]

I take it that you are renting to less than six people sharing kitchen, bathroom and sitting room. In that case you are using the house as a single dwelling. Just because HMO rules regard it as more than one household that doesn't mean that it's not a single dwelling. If you convert the house into two or more self contained units then clearly it is no longer a single dwelling.
How about if, for example, you retain a room there that you say you are living in and rent the other rooms to lodgers, are they going to class it as requiring planning permission. No, of course not, because you don't need planning to take in lodgers as the house remains a single dwelling.
If you rent the whole house to five sharers they will also be using it as a single dwelling.
The council have stated that you may let the whole house out to students, by this very statement they have contradicted themselves.
Have you got it in writing that you may let to students?

[john carling]

hi philip thanks for answering.we were renting to six people planning do not have a problem with six.its more than six they do.they were sharing 1 kitchen etc but this not really the problem as i see it. the problem acording to them is noise refuse etc so we cannot have a hmo situation where there are single contracts for each room but we can rent it to students a family or a group of people who have a hobby ie train spotting i guess!!on separate contracts.planning was saying if they go out for a drink it ok.We could rent it to a family of 20 people that would be ok.A large family but each had a single contract this would be a single household!!!!lol..this all getting missleading to clear up acording to planning it does not matter what the contract is or the number of kitchens etc it how they live.and this is why its been such a problem/grey area. having a single contract does not mean they are living as a single dwelling.as i have said we have people who have pushed the wording to the limit and at the moment it is enforced so it could be used around the country as a presidence.
the enforcement as writen above is all to do with impact on the area and it all the word of the local residence produced with no prof as there was no impact on the area.
No i not have it in writing about students but it no problem they have confirmed this several times.
keep asking john

[red40]

They most probably contradicted themselves meaning the difference between the Housing Act 2004 and the Planning Act.

Different rules apply to different Acts and regulations, take the wash hand basins rule under the Housing Act. If you convert a building into 6 bedsits, building control wont ask for whb's in rooms, you will only find this out when you come to licence it under the Housing Act. Hard luck if you have total refurbished the place before licensing it.

[philip benham]

[QUOTE=john carling;24252]hi philip thanks for answering.we were renting to six people planning do not have a problem with six.
OK, it depends on bathroom facilities and size of kitchen. One bathroom means maximum five people in my experience.

its more than six they do.they were sharing 1 kitchen etc but this not really the problem as i see it. the problem acording to them is noise refuse etc so we cannot have a hmo situation where there are single contracts for each room but we can rent it to students a family or a group of people who have a hobby ie train spotting i guess!!on separate contracts.planning was saying if they go out for a drink it ok.We could rent it to a family of 20 people that would be ok.A large family but each had a single contract this would be a single household!!!!lol..this all getting missleading to clear up acording to planning it does not matter what the contract is
interesting, that means they are not claiming that you need one contract to use it as a single dwelling.

or the number of kitchens etc it how they live.and this is why its been such a problem/grey area. having a single contract does not mean they are living as a single dwelling.as i have said we have people who have pushed the wording to the limit and at the moment it is enforced so it could be used around the country as a presidence.
the enforcement as writen above is all to do with impact on the area and it all the word of the local residence produced with no prof as there was no impact on the area.
True, they are stating that there will be impact on the area, however their main argument is that you are not using it as a single dwelling. It is clearly a single dwelling.

No i not have it in writing about students but it no problem they have confirmed this several times.
keep asking john
Ok, in your position I would write and state I am considering letting to a group of students. If they confirm in writing then they have contradicted themselves. A student let is an HMO let and will have the same impact on the area. In my opinion the law is that planning permission is not required when you have six or less living in the house and you will win on this. Please keep us informed, I find this interesting. Cheers Philip.

[john carling]

thanks phill . seems like a good arguement you say about students i will look into it ,,many thanks john,

[john carling]

hi red so far nothing has been said about whb's so i wont bring it up. when you talk about licence i guess you mean hmo . at the moment i have no problems with the hmo licence we have by luck had a single family take on the place so it not an issue at the moment.and as i have already said hmo have been around and there only minor work ie upgrade fire alarm and felt around fire doors we lucky with the house..

[propman2]

back to philips comment on 10 year rule, I think this case may be a change of use? and if this is the case the relevant period is 4 years

i dont think establishing all other hmo's without consent will help other than incur the wrath of a multitude of other landlords!.......only time it would help is if consents have been granted in similar circumstances to yours hence setting a precedent

one of the key considerations planners consider when looking at planning applications is amenity and if amenity of others is harmed this is a problem

[philip benham]

[QUOTE=propman2;24292]back to philips comment on 10 year rule, I think this case may be a change of use? and if this is the case the relevant period is 4 years
It's ten years in this case. Also, note John's earlier post, the council stated the past TEN years. You are probably thinking of change of use to a single dwelling.

i dont think establishing all other hmo's without consent will help other than incur the wrath of a multitude of other landlords!.......
Sorry, don't agree. Planning law should apply fairly to everybody. The wrath of the landlords, if any, would be directed at the council.

only time it would help is if consents have been granted in similar circumstances to yours hence setting a precedent
No consents would have been granted in similar circumstances. One does not need planning consent in the circumstances that John has outlined.

one of the key considerations planners consider when looking at planning applications is amenity and if amenity of others is harmed this is a problem
True, but from the facts that John has thus far furnished us with he does not require planning permission. The house is a single dwelling. It will remain a single dwelling even if he has sharers in there. Regards Phil.

[john carling]

hi propman2 thankyou for replying i need as much feedback as possible otherwise i feel i may miss something and we all know what the law is like , everything is correct then there a little law that pops up from nowhere that means we are all wrong. your comments had me thinking but then i read philip comments and he seems to have answered eveything for me, thankyou phillip again. please propman2 have a read and let me know your thoughts. i dont want to miss anything. if anybody has any thoughts about where i could be wrong please do say so ..many thanks john

[propman2]

thanks

back to philips comments

1. if you are saying a change of use could include that to a single dwelling then its logical that it would also apply the other way round ie single to multi.....the planning authority may quote 10 years to distract from the 4 year rule...requires clarification whether it is a change of use or not

2. I also believe that 'intensification' of an existing use can amount to requiring planning consent, check whether this applies as this may take you out of the realms of 'single dwelling'

You really need to bottom out the substance of what is or is not needed here in planning terms

3. I dont agree that it is not worth looking at similar situations to establish a precedent. Planning is not an exact science and for that reason anomalies in planning decisioins will arise

I am not convinced the fundamentals have been bottomed out here chaps

[john carling]

thankyou propman2 for your reply
You and philip seem to be getting to the bottom of this. i am not an expert on this and when words like "intensification" are used i feel i am out of my depth but i will loook into what you have said and get back to you all ,,many thanks for the advice keep it comming .john

[philip benham]

thanks

back to philips comments

[QUOTE]1. if you are saying a change of use could include that to a single dwelling then its logical that it would also apply the other way round ie single to multi.....It would be logical, but it's not the case.

the planning authority may quote 10 years to distract from the 4 year rule...requires clarification whether it is a change of use or notNot in this case, the planner knows it's ten years.

2. I also believe that 'intensification' of an existing use can amount to requiring planning consent, check whether this applies as this may take you out of the realms of 'single dwelling'Intensification would perhaps be if he lets to more than six sharers, which I believe John is not intending.



3. I dont agree that it is not worth looking at similar situations to establish a precedent. That is why I advised John that he should check out the other HMOs in his area.
Planning is not an exact science and for that reason anomalies in planning decisioins will ariseTrue, but in this case John simply wants to let his house to sharers. Nothing unusual about that, thousands of houses are let this way.

[john carling]

Hi Philip .in a previous note you mention about getting a letter from planning to see if we can put students in the house argument being they have the same impact on the area. well we already have a letter from head of planning saying that we can have students or sharers ( the sharers must have a common interest this goes back to hobby argument) the letter was written buy the same peoson that issued the enforcemnt order. i hope this makes our appeal stronger!!!

[philip benham]

I am very interested in how you progress. I just searched on the subject of HMO planning and came up with links that may help further.
The first is an interesting Bristol Council page, scroll down to bottom and download Enforcement of Planning Control - Houses in Multiple Occupation and Shared Houses.pdf.
It touches on several aspects we have already discussed including the ten/four year planning rules.
http://www.bristol-city.gov.uk/ccm/content/Environment-Planning/Planning/planning-enforcements.en

Second is SPLA, scroll down to last couple paragraphs, they seem of the opinion more than six sharers before needing planning consent.
http://www.spla.co.uk/document_archive/Guidance_Notes_for_landlords_No.HMO.1_-_HMO_Licencing.pdf#search=%22HMO%20planning%20engl and%22

Third, another interesting read from Bristol area.
http://www.rcas.org.uk/Download_files/Our%20Changing%20Environment.pdf#search=%22class%2 0c3%20hmo%22
I hope the links work OK, any problems please feel free to email me.
Please let us know how you progress with this, cheers Phil.