Updating post from Reddit.
Strange scenario - tenant is renting a 3-bed flat with only one person on the AST.
They’ve rented the property for many years with no issue and while we suspected they may have been subletting the extra rooms, there was never any clear evidence nor any issues.
They have recently become very insistent on getting a license even offering to submit the application and pay for it themselves.
We’ve quite clearly said no but they have started contacting the council and become quite a difficult tenant. We do not wish to operate the property as an hmo and would re-let to a couple to be compliant.
I’d like to see issue S8 to remove so we can have a clear slate but our managing agent is being useless about it claiming we can’t.
Can’t issue S21 as within four months of latest AST.
If you have used one of the standard ASTs like the NRLA one there will be a clause in it requiring the tenant to use the flat as a single dwelling, an HMO is obviously not a single dwelling so you should be able to serve notice in the tenant for breach of the tenancy even though the fixed term has not expired.
Legally I think the tenant could apply for an HMO licence but they would need to have the landlord’s consent. They would also be likely to end up with quite a big bill for improvements - fire doors on all rooms as a minimum.
This is an odd situation, I would speculate that they have been operating the flat as an HMO and someone has reported them to the council which has asked them to apply for a licence. Very unlikely they would apply on their own initiative. If you have a BTL mortgage on the property converting it to an HMO would almost certainly be a breach of the mortgage terms and conditions.
Thank you and yes, this is what we think has happened too.
We humoured the tenant for a bit and applied for the licence. The council responded that as there was only one person on the tenancy, we did not need a licence. The tenant then sent us a fairly patronising email about how we had applied for the wrong licence, and then contacted the council themselves.
Our letting agent - who has usually been very good over the years - is close to retirement and seems to have stopped caring. I instructed him to issue a S8 and he said I should I use landlord action! Not sure what we are paying him for. He then said the RRB will invalidate any eviction notices, which, again, I informed him was incorrect as there is a transitional period.
We may actually just use landlord action as the cost is not so bad if we can get the flat back.
The RRB hasn’t come in yet and even when it does I don’t think it will invalidate notices issued before it starts. And in any case you will still be able to evict tenants who breach the terms of their tenancy and converting a flat to an HMO is obviously a breach.
Agreed - thank you!
Can you also contact the council and make it known that you oppose any licence and multi occupancy. That might be enough to stop it dead.
Hi - thank you. Yes, we have contacted the person at the council and made it clear we do not want a licence.
Do not accept the HMO. We recently declared an HMO (3 young professionals sharing a 3-bed flat in our building) to our building insurer and our premium when up the roof. In fact, our regular insurer declined to renew the policy specifically because of this, and we had to opt for much more expensive options. I have since informed the flat owner that he cannot have an HMO prior to our next insurance renewal, and thus may he have to evict the tenants.
Yes, agreed. Would also invalidate the current BTL mortgage meaning a new far more expensive mortgage. Not worth the faff on all fronts.
Do you have proof of subletting though, as you might be wasting money using an s8 notice for breach of lease if you have no proof. Also, if your tenant is still living in the property, and sublets to 2 people, they would be lodgers as he is a resident landlord. And you can have 2 lodgers without needing a HMO license.
As lodgers he can easily evict them by changing locks (peaceful eviction) and your s8 notice would fail in court.