Outrage at surge of town homes used as bedsits
COUNCIL PROPOSING A CHANGE IN THE RULES
OUTRAGE over a sudden growth in bedsits across Burton could force a council to change its rules after claims in housing benefits quadrupled.
Complaints have been made about 104 properties across East Staffordshire which are believed not to have planning permission they need to continue operating as “Houses of Multiple Occupation” (HMOS).
An HMO is a single house occupied by three or more people living separately, but sharing one or more basic amenities.
An upsurge in HMOS – with many believed to be flouting the rules without planning permission – has seen a huge rise in taxpayers’ money paid out in housing benefits, East Staffordshire Borough Council says.
Currently, larger HMOS accommodating more than six people require planning approval, while smaller ones do not.
Houses in Anglesey believed to need permission to be officially converted received the most complaints – 28, with Eton Park and Horninglow receiving 15 and 14 respectively.
Homes in Shobnall were the subject of 10 complaints and those in Burton and Stapenhill saw six each. Winshill properties has received four complaints, with two in Stretton.
Branston, Brizlincote, Needwood, and Tutbury and Outwoods properties prompted one complaint each to the borough council.
Now, bosses from East Staffordshire Borough Council are considering imposing a change which would mean owners would need permission to convert a home into an HMO, no matter how many people live there.
The council has noticed a growth in these smaller homes – and it has been recommended that it impose an “Article 4 direction”.
A report which will be discussed at cabinet on Monday, explained: “There is evidence of significant growth in the amount of family homes being converted into HMOS, this has resulted in relatively high number of complaints and an increase in lost housing benefit subsidy.
“Other local authorities have successfully used an Article 4 direction requiring property owners to obtain planning permission prior to changing the use to HMO in order to control this growth. For this reason the recommendation of this report is to create a draft Article 4 direction.”
The report revealed the scale of the issue, saying: “There have been five planning applications pertaining to HMOS in the past year, and 18 over the last five years. There are currently 74 licensed HMOS, and a further 35 that the environmental health department believe require a licence.
“These numbers are outstripped by the 104 properties about which complaints have been received as potentially needing planning permission. “Well managed HMOS are an important source of low cost, private sector housing for students and others seeking temporary accommodation. “However, a proliferation of HMOS in certain areas can present challenges to the future sustainability of neighbourhoods, and impact on their character and residential amenity. In particular, insecure housing and high levels of transience can have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area.”
The report noted that housing benefit paid to not-for-profit-supported accommodation providers totalled £1,250,000 in 2020-21. In 2017-18 it paid just £250,000.
It said: “It is noticeable that the housing benefit paid to not for profit providers has quadrupled over the last four years, and it is known that the vast majority of such provision is based on the conversion of family homes into HMOS.”
It added: “Through housing benefit claims processed by the council we are aware of significant growth in HMOS providing support to their residents. Due to the nature of this provision the residents have additional needs, which poses important questions around infrastructure and concentration.
“The purpose of an Article 4 direction would be to give the council more control over housing stock through the ability to control the density of HMOS in a given area..”
If the direction is passed, it is recommended that it not come into force for 12 months due to a risk of compensation claims against the council by landowners and developers.
High levels of transience can have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area.
Council report