Will lodgers having frequent guests make it an HMO?

**Pureedfruit** · 15-02-2012 10:27 AM

Sorry if I should have started a new thread but this is a variation on the guests question.

My wife and I have just two lodgers so are just outside the HMO regulations. One of the lodgers has her boyfriend stay 4 nights a week. Does that risk us now being caught up in the HMO regulations?

**mind the gap** · 15-02-2012 21:19 PM

Originally Posted by Pureedfruit

Sorry if I should have started a new thread but this is a variation on the guests question.

My wife and I have just two lodgers so are just outside the HMO regulations. One of the lodgers has her boyfriend stay 4 nights a week. Does that risk us now being caught up in the HMO regulations?

Possibly. However it is your house and you call the shots. If you don't want the b/f to stay over (and 4 nights per week does start to look as though he is living there), you are perfectly within your rights to ban him altogether. If your lodger doesn't like it, tough. TBH, unless the boyfriend is paying you for the electricity he uses and gas and the general extra wear and tear he causes, I would say you are being taken for a bit of a mug. Your lodger is a guest in your home and is abusing her position, in my view.

Do you have a written contract with her - and if so, does it say anything about overnight visitors?

**Snorkerz** · 16-02-2012 11:46 AM

Whilst agreeing totally with MTG, I think the issue of HMO depends on whether this is the visitors primary residence. In pure 'time' terms, it would appear to be (4 nights at yours, 3 somewhere else) but iirc there is much more to it than that. Things like where his bank account sends post to, where he pays council tax, (where his wife and kids live?!?). I am guessing your home is not his.

**mind the gap** · 16-02-2012 20:02 PM

Originally Posted by Snorkerz

Whilst agreeing totally with MTG, I think the issue of HMO depends on whether this is the visitors primary residence. In pure 'time' terms, it would appear to be (4 nights at yours, 3 somewhere else) but iirc there is much more to it than that. Things like where his bank account sends post to, where he pays council tax, (where his wife and kids live?!?). I am guessing your home is not his.

I agree, but it's probably academic anyway, isn't it?

OP may be thinking, 'I can use the fact that that b/f's presence is making it an HMO and breaking the rules to put pressure on my lodger not to let her b/f stay so much', but the point is that OP doesn't need a reason, does he? He can just tell her he doesn't allow overnight guests, full stop. It's his home.

It might be different if he were a non-resident LL of an HMO...but he isn't.

**Bel** · 16-02-2012 21:01 PM

The OP may not own the property. He may be a tenant himself.

**mind the gap** · 18-02-2012 20:04 PM

Originally Posted by Bel

The OP may not own the property. He may be a tenant himself.

I don't think that changes anything though, does it (except perhaps in OP's favour*)? A lodger is a lodger, not a tenant (even if his LL is a tenant). A loger has little security of tenure and that lodger's hanger-on b/f has even less!

(*i.e. b/f's presence may well take the property into HMO territory, even if it wasn't before).

**Snorkerz** · 18-02-2012 20:15 PM

Going slightly off topic. . .

If a home owner has more than 2 lodgers, it is a HMO.

However, if a Tenant (with family) has only 1 lodger then it is occupied by persons who do not form a single household - so would that be a HMO? I know it's not a HMO if 'more than 1 household' is just 2 peeps - but this wouldn't be.

**mind the gap** · 19-02-2012 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by Snorkerz

Going slightly off topic. . .

If a home owner has more than 2 lodgers, it is a HMO.

However, if a Tenant (with family) has only 1 lodger then it is occupied by persons who do not form a single household - so would that be a HMO? I know it's not a HMO if 'more than 1 household' is just 2 peeps - but this wouldn't be.

No, it's based on the concept of a 'household' comprising:

(i)a single person unrelated by blood rmarital/conjugal relationship to anyone else in the property (e.g. siblings, parents, spouse etc. I think step-siblings and first cousins are counted as related, but no more distant relatives than that).
(ii) a couple or group of people related to each other e.g. family, co-habiting etc.

So technically if OP's lodger's bf moved in with her her (ie co-habiting), she and he would still be one household and presumably not take OP into HMO territory (although it may contravene overcrowding rules if the room is not deemed large enough for a couple).

Which is why OP shouldn't rely on that argument, just put his foot down and boot the blighter out!

**Snorkerz** · 19-02-2012 13:33 PM

Sorry MTG, I'm not refering to the OPs case here - just clarifying something in my own head.

Do you agree with my first point? If a home owner has more than 2 lodgers, it is a HMO.

I am assuming a lodger is not considered part of the landlords household . . . or is he???

**mind the gap** · 19-02-2012 20:47 PM

Originally Posted by Snorkerz

Sorry MTG, I'm not refering to the OPs case here - just clarifying something in my own head.

Do you agree with my first point? If a home owner has more than 2 lodgers, it is a HMO.

I am assuming a lodger is not considered part of the landlords household . . . or is he???

Yes, I agree with your first point.

Logically, a lodger must not be considered part of a LL's family/household, otherwise a LL could have as many lodgers as he wished and it still wouldn't be an HMO because they would all form one single household. I think the 'two or fewer lodgers + res. LL' rule is an exception to the normal HMO rules. Once you get to three or more lodgers, the rule (plus related fire regs, etc.) kicks in as normal.

This link explains it:

http://www.lacors.gov.uk/lacors/Cont....aspx?id=15426