A landlord pair have failed to convince a tribunal judge that their tenants’ relationship excused them from getting an HMO licence.

Ketan and Shwetaben Gohil believed that two of the four tenants were a couple and the other two were related, which meant they did not need a licence under Hounslow Council’s additional HMO scheme. However, a First Tier Property Tribunal found that even if the tenants were related, this was not a defence and ordered the landlords to pay a £11,250 Rent Repayment Order.

The tenants insisted that they had not told Ketan Gohil they were related and during the viewing had made clear that they were looking for three bedrooms and were four friends moving in.

Related

Gohil, who has been a landlord for seven years and rents out three properties, said he had not applied for a licence before as all the properties were let as family units. He also believed that two of the tenants were related, despite having different names, and suggested they were maybe “cousin-brothers” or stepbrothers. He believed that the property would need a licence only if there was more than one household.

The tenants also complained about fire safety failings at the terraced house, in Kendal Close, Feltham, including a shortage of fire alarms, no fire doors, and no locks on bedroom doors.

Defence

The judge said that even if the landlords truly believed that the applicants were two couples and that two were related, this would not be a defence even if it were true. “The lack of licence was due to the first respondent’s misunderstanding of the law. In addition to this, the property was advertised as a three-bedroom property and the tribunal finds that it was made clear by the applicants that they would need three bedrooms.”

He ruled that the RRO should be 75% of the total rent paid.

‍