Restrictive Covenant / HMO

[SteveFLS]

Thanks Equus, the covenant does seem to preclude use as HMO until Roberts v Howlett is considered which is where we started this post, I was hoping that there might be more info available that supports this still to be the case but equally helpful if anybody knows anything to the contrary. I don't think it's a matter of quibbling but rather am information gathering in advance of asking legal advice, obviously case authority and context might have to be considered by Court ultimately but that's an avenue I'm very reluctant to go down unless able to mitigate the risk with indemnity insurance.

Paul - I wouldn't rent out to students other than as a properly licensed C4 small HMO using AST fully compliant with the RC and Planning Consent, It would be managed by a reputable letting agent though I'm happy to be involved to some extent as I will be living not too far away. I worked professionally for a long time supporting young people and wouldn't be doing anything to jeopardise their rights or position as tenants.


Although more costly to run as HMO than as a family let and certainly with more legislation and involviment with the the Local Authority the 30% figure represents a net £800 -£900 per month to me at a time when my pension income is about to take a big hit in divorce proceedings. Am very conscious that all of the above also comes with the caveat re ' the new normal ' post C-19 especially since the university currently attracts a high number of overseas students. Thanks very much for your input guys..

[Equus]

SteveFLS said:

Thanks Equus, the covenant does seem to preclude use as HMO until Roberts v Howlett is considered...

We seem to be going round in ever decreasing circles.

As I've already said, Roberts vs. Howlett depends on being able to prove that the occupants are, for some reason and despite being unrelated, living together because they are a pre-formed single household (social unit).

The default position is, was and always will be that a group of unrelated individuals sharing a house together will be a HMO, unless it is determined in a court of law that there are special and unusual circumstances that dictate otherwise.

...and proving it is, was, and always will be more hassle than it's worth.

[SteveFLS]

Thanks again Equus, I guess I'm looking for what the courts have accepted as being a ' pre - formed single household ' though unrelated. This could inform whether worth the trouble of taking it further however propties in the immediate area have done well in terms of capital growth over the last few years with the city being in something of a bubble compared with most other parts of the county - so thinking that it might be worth taking the trouble as could generate income for me and provide a useful asset for my adult kids for when I fall off the twig...Steve

[Equus]

SteveFLS said:

I guess I'm looking for what the courts have accepted as being a ' pre - formed single household '

You're looking at a single case.

You're look for what you want to hear.

You're not going to hear it from me, so I'll say this just one more time, then I'm oot: unless there are exceptional circumstances to justify otherwise, multiple unrelated individuals sharing a house is a HMO. Expect a long, expensive and probably fruitless legal battle to prove anything different.

[Mgd_uk]

What about selling up and buying an already setup HMO?

[SteveFLS]

Thanks very much both, food for thought !

[paulrockliffe]

Letting to a group of students using an AST is not the same as a HMO as I understand it. A HMO is let a room at a time to whoever and was avoided like the plague in student areas, certainly when I was a student, because you could just as easily let to a group on a joint and several liability basis. If you go the HMO route there is a whole world of pain in converting the property - mains fire detection in every room, fire alarm break glasses, extinguishers, fire doors.

The one time I stayed in one the owner was getting reamed by the Council for all sorts, by the time I left it was like living in a care home there was so much safety stuff everywhere.

I wouldn't want to even think about the liability if you let a room to a nutter by mistake.

[Equus]

paulrockliffe said:

Letting to a group of students using an AST is not the same as a HMO as I understand it.

There may be a difference in terms of tenancy legislation, but there is no distinction in terms of Planning and Environmental Health definitions.

In Planning terms, there is the possible complication that purpose built student accommodation will sometimes be classed as Sui Generis rather than C4 (see discussion HERE), but it's all completely irrelevant to the OP: his restrictive covenant states that any use apart from as a single dwelling (ie. equivalent to Planning Use Class C3) is prohibited.

[SteveFLS]

Thanks both, do we think that the RC would prevent me from keeping the house in C3 and letting it to a group of students on a joint & several liability AST ? The house would remain a ' single private dwelling house ' ?

[Dixy]

Inkyfingers said:

The OP said that the neighbours have the benefit of this covenant.

What does that actually mean. Covenants often say things like not to put a fence higher than 4 feet on the front garden. it is for the benefit of the neighbours but can they directly enforce it.

[Equus]

[Dixy]

For the avoidance of doubt and to confirm you believe I am terminally stupid. You are saying that the neighbour can take direct action through the court rather than having to involve the party who imposed the covenant, despite the fact that the neighbour has no direct contract to enforce.