We currently have a situation where many people are unable to pay their rent due to lost jobs, and many people, particularly young people, are unable to afford anywhere to live.
Surely one answer to this is to allow tenants to take in a lodger?
It could help families to pay their rent and make available at a stroke a vast amount of affordable accommodation for single people.
The main reason why, in rented property, lodgers are rarely allowed is the HMO legislation.
Other problems are mortgage and insurance conditions – but these can be overcome. The main problem is the HMO one.
If, say, a family of four takes in a lodger, this will immediately make the property a licensable HMO, and the landlord could be prosecuted if he does not get a license. If he does apply for a license he will probably be ordered to do a lot of expensive works by the council as a condition of granting the license.
No landlord is going to want that.
But the HMO regulations were not really designed for a ‘one lodger’ situation, particularly if the lodger is sharing with a family. They are just obstructing the more efficient use of property.
If there any way the law can be changed to permit genuine lodgers?
At the moment property owners are allowed to take in two lodgers before this is deemed to be an HMO. They are even encouraged to do so by the ‘rent a room’ tax scheme.
People renting their home are denied this. It is one of the big differences between homeowners and tenants.
Surely there must be some way this can be changed to permit genuine lodger situations? For example, maybe the Housing Act 2004 (which contains the main definitions of an HMO) could be amended to provide for tenants to take in one lodger where this does not create overcrowding?
If the tenancy agreement prohibits subletting, as virtually all do, then landlords could be expected to agree to reasonable requests (in the same way that landlords are now expected to agree to home businesses) subject to suitable conditions and provided it did not create overcrowding.
Some final thoughts
I have a form for my Landlord Law members (also available here) which amends a tenancy agreement to permit subletting along with various clauses to protect the landlord (eg checking and referencing, requiring the tenant to give the lodger an approved lodger agreement, etc).
However sadly at the moment, there are very few circumstances (really only where there is a sole tenant – as two occupiers cannot be an HMO) under which landlords are able to use it.
Maybe the tenant’s organisations should agitate for the law to be changed to permit tenants to take in a lodger in suitable circumstances?
Allowing tenants to take in a lodger makes a bit of a mockery of all the legislation that has been allegedly been brought in for tenant safety. Or will the tenant be required to bring the house up to HMO standard?
What effect will it have on RGI? Will the tenant be required to get a reference from a reputable agency?
What happens if the tenant leaves but the lodger stays on? The landlord is going to be stuck with going to court to get them out.
I agree wholeheartedly. I can see no advantage for landlords, only potential adverse ramifications. Who’s to say having a lodger will make a tenant pay rent?
As well as Adam’s observations, there is no control over who comes in, no referencing, more wear and tear on the property etc.
Its a licence to let dodgy tenants in by the back door – people who have no contractual obligations whatsoever and who might otherwise be unable obtain a tenancy in their own right. It amounts to yet more progress to expropriation of landlords’ property – as if current governmental control isn’t enough.
JM and Adam – You deal with these issues by only giving permission to tenants you trust and where you do give permission, setting conditions – for example:
That they should check and reference potential lodgers and provide copies of this to you the landlord
That your approval is required for the lodger selected
That the tenant will be responsible for compensating the landlord for any damage done by the tenant
That if the lodger remains in the property after the end of the tenancy the tenant will be liable for the costs of eviction
Etc
Provided you have. been careful in your choice of tenant, they will respect these conditions and will take care to be compliant.
We have a form on Landlord Law for landlords to use when granting permission although I have to say it is not used often!
Those are things that would need to be addressed in the legislation.
The legislation would need to say it does not become a HMO by taking in a lodger.
The legislation would need to provide for swift legal removal of any lodger who remains beyond the end of a tenancy (except where there is a replacement tenancy).
The legislation would need to put all legal liability for not conforming with housing law because of the lodger onto the tenant, NOT The landlord.
“You deal with these issues by only giving permission to tenants you trust”.
Is “not trusting them” a valid reason for not granting permission?
What evidence would be needed to support this?
I agree that in general it would be good to allow tenants easily to take in a lodger, but the real problem is framing the rules such that criminal landlords cannot take advantage of them to run illegal HMOs.
I can foresee inexpert tenants getting into hot water for not giving their lodger a Gas Safety Certificate or checking their Right to Rent or failing to change the batteries in the smoke alarms or providing furniture that is not fire rated or failing to behave in a ‘tenant like manner’ in relation to minor repairs or thinking they can just keep the tenants deposit because the deposit legislation doesn’t apply or….