Browse All Tribes or choose a Tribe below:
By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google
By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Don't have an account? Sign Up
To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.
Can someone explain how Article 4 works please?
I'm considering letting my main home but live in a part of Bristol hit by Article 4. The minimum number of tenants to trigger HMO licensing in Bristol is 5. Does Article 4 map directly onto this, i.e. if you don't trigger HMO licensing you can ignore Article 4?
One of the letting agents I've approached told me Article 4 kicked in at 3 tenants, which seems bizarre there should be a difference. Incredibly, neither the HMO nor Planning departments of Bristol City Council could tell me.
All the best
In a nutshell Andy, it means you can only let your house a family - not sharers.
It's all about planning classes and nothing to do with HMO licensing.
HMO Article 4 Directions are not linked to property licensing. They remove permitted development rights to change the property from a single family property (use class C3) to an HMO with 3 to 6 occupants (use class C4). As such, a new HMO development occupied after the date the direction comes into force would need planning consent, even if no licence is needed.
You can read a fuller explanation on my website here:
Richard Tacagni MCIEH CEnvH
London Property Licensing
This information is intended as general advice and guidance. It is not legal advice and should not be taken or relied upon as such. No liability can be accepted for any reliance on the information published in this response. You may wish to obtain independent legal advice.
do you have any views on how an established use as an hmo in LB Newham enhances value, i.e. roughly how much more would an hmo house (no modifications) be worth over an identical house which could only be let to families?
You should read the thread on HMO ICTB
You may find far from increasing in value it will be the same as a normal property.
i dont think so. CT dont apply to HMO'S let under a single AST, which is what I am referring to i.e. '...(no modifications)...'.
I would suggest you approach a local agent for advice on that, although I imagine the answer will depend on the nature and size of the property and the quality of the conversion.
please note there is no 'conversion'; the sole difference is permitted/ established usage (by a group of sharers who are friends) and higher rent as a result of the artificial restriction on supply of hmo's as a result of article 4 and licensing.
this will be well over the heads of agents.
Good question Joe.
I don't have anything in L.B.N, but I do know elsewhere there is definitely a premium on established C4 properties in A4D areas.
Many thanks for your reply Richard. This is pretty worrying. Couple of questions though.
I understand that the planning criteria include lodger (resident landlord) situations. In this case does the resident landlord (me) count towards the number of individuals living there?
I've had between one and three lodgers in the house for over ten years now. Does this count as "a continuous use as an HMO for 10 years", even though no license exists - in other words does the fact that I've pretty much been operating as an HMO according to the planning definition (albeit not above the local HMO licensing threshold) mean that no conversion is taking place at this time so I wouldn't need to apply?
Clutching straws? Yeh, but you have to ask. :-)
An owner-occupied property with two lodgers is not classed as an HMO. It only becomes an HMO under the Housing Act 2004 when there are three or more lodgers.