Hammersmith and Fulham borough council have announced that they are changing their policy on small houses of multiple occupation, by requiring them to secure planning permission.
Councillors have received a white paper, and it is expected that the change will be enforced in a years’ time.
Houses of multiple occupation are residential properties that are rented by at least three unrelated people who share a bathroom, a toilet or kitchen facilities.
The council insists it is a move to raise minimum standards, on areas such as home and room sizes, parking and cycle storage facilities, and waste collection, as opposed to necessarily stopping growth.
However, the expected implication is that the extra regulation for landlords intending on converting to HMOs will prevent increases in the number of HMOs.
Phillip Dermott, 59, an HMO owner who in Hammersmith and Fulham resents the council for this change.
He said: “We need HMOs for people who want to share houses, particularly short term. They work particularly well for students and young professionals by assuring that flexibility they need. I don’t know why the council is trying to stop this when we are in a housing crisis and people need rooms.”
Currently, the law is that these properties need to be registered with the council, but issues have been raised about numbers of illegal, unregistered HMOS.
The difference between small and large HMOs is the number of people.
In Hammersmith and Fulham, those with 7 or more inhabitants require planning permission but smaller HMOs, 3 or more do not. This policy will change that, requiring HMOs to have planning permission.
Of the 4600 HMOs in Hammersmith and Fulham, small HMOs make up the total majority of 4000, whereas large HMOs make up 6000.
A spokesperson for the London Rental Union, Jae Vail, said: “A lot of our members are in HMOs that are really overcrowded, that have real issues with safety and damp, mould and disrepair, and leaks.
“There are a lot of problems with fire safety. A lot of HMOs are unlicensed. We know that there are many, but it is difficult to know exact figures.”
They support moves to curb growth as “HMOs are a great way for landlords to get rich over the most overcrowded and unsafe living conditions. They are not something we want to see more of.”
Based on council figures, Westminster City council has the highest number of HMOs, with Kensington and Chelsea borough council second and Lambeth third.
Crucially, these figures come from those that are registered HMOs. It is expected that in some areas there are less, because of the fact they are unregistered.
The change in policy from Hammersmith and Fulham has raised questions on whether other councils with high numbers of HMOs will follow suit.
Lambeth Council already must have planning permission on large HMOs, but not small ones.
The borough of Sutton is currently in the process of changing their policy.
This is one way to curb growth, but some campaigners say it doesn’t go far enough, with others preferring measures such as requiring tenants to notify neighbours of new HMOs.
Tom Roberts who lives in an unregistered HMO in Hammersmith supports these plans.
Roberts said: “Anything that will make the council do more for tenants is welcomed by me.
“My house is in complete disrepair, and my landlord does not listen to me or my housemates.”
A spokesperson for ACORN, the housing union also said: “Whilst HMOs can offer a more affordable option for many renters, cramming unrelated adults into shared housing is not the solution to our housing crisis.
“They encourage landlords to buy up family homes, and convert them into crowded and often low quality accommodation, whilst pricing families out of the market.
“We welcome any additional licensing schemes to regulate existing HMOs, as these give tenants more protection and can be used to improve standards.
“I would suspect there are thousands of unlicensed HMOs across the city, and would like to see councils be more proactive in investigating and enforcing the law.”
Featured image: BEN ELLIOTT on Unsplash
Join the discussion