Here is a question to the blog clinic from Chris who is a landlord
As a resident landlord, does any deposit given by tenant have to be lodged with Tenancy Deposit Scheme, please?
Answer
No. The tenancy deposit scheme only applies to assured shorthold tenancies.
If you are a resident landlord, ie if you live in the same building as your tenant, then this (save as set out below) cannot be an assured shorthold tenancy as resident landlords are excluded by the Housing Act 1988 which set up the statutory code which created assured and assured shorthold tenancies.
So if you are renting out a granny annexe or a garden flat in your home, or if you have converted your house to flats and live in one of them and rent out the others – these will not be assured shorthold tenancies and you will not be obliged to protect your tenants’ deposits.
However, note that if you own two or more flats in a purpose-built block of flats and live in one and rent out the other – this tenancy will then be an assured shorthold tenancy as the Housing Act specifically provides for this.
Despite the fact that the deposit does not need to be protected, note that it is still the tenants’ money, and other rules relating to deposits will still apply. For example that landlords cannot make deductions for ‘fair wear and tear’ and may sometimes only be able to claim a percentage of the cost of a new replacement item to take account of ‘betterment’. Which is a rule which prevents landlords from profiting when replacing older items damaged by tenants with brand new ones.
“if you have converted your house to flats and live in one of them and rent out the others”.
What if you have bought such a conversion and live in one?
It won’t be a purpose built block of flats so will tenancies granted will be resident landlord tenancies.
https://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/basic_protectionexcluded_occupiers/who_has_basic_protection#_ednref9
“It has also been held to be possible that an existing house could be rebuilt as a purpose-built block of flats if, for example, it was completely gutted and reconstructed, as in effect the extent of the work would be such as to create a new building.”
They cite Barnes v Gorsuch for this.
Do you have anything more on this judgement?
My understanding is that house conversions can never be classed as ‘purpose-built’.