Marketing No Comments

Armley: Another shared house plan knocked back by council

Leeds City Council has continued its hard-line stance against plans for shared houses in Armley by refusing ANOTHER planning application.

A revised planning application for a house in multiple occupation (HMO) would have seen six single bedrooms created in the end terrace family home in Brooklyn Place – down from original proposals submitted last August for nine beds.

The plans received letters in both opposition and support from local residents.

In refusing the application, a council planning report says:

“The applicant argues that this will provide a much needed alternative form of low cost housing for this area. However, the area is not considered to be lacking in HMO’s or flats and there is no known need for such.

“There is however recognised to be a need for family housing across the district, and this would provide accommodation for a larger or extended family unit. The loss of this unit is therefore objected to.

“The intensification in use of the property is also considered to result in harm to amenity, through overcrowding (demonstrated by lack of bathroom facilities), noise and increased parking demand. The revisions put forward by the applicant have not overcome these concerns. The change of use is therefore objected to. “

There has been a spate of  HMO refusals by the council in Armley following a landmark decision last August which refused plans for a HMO in Conference Road. Developers are currently appealing against that decision. Similar plans in Barden Grove were also refused by the council.

A HMO is a house which has been converted entirely into bedsits or other non-self-contained accommodation. More details here.

Source: West Leeds Dispatch

Marketing No Comments

Have your say on how council manages houses in multiple occupation in Wrexham

Members of the public are being invited to have their say on how a council manages houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).

In recent months Wrexham Council has received a spate of planning applications to turn properties into HMOs.

Some of the more notable applications reported on by the Leader recently include the refusal of a 20 room extension to an existing HMO in Pentre Felin, the conversion of a property in Pen y Bryn into a 10 bedroom HMO, which was approved on appeal, and plans to convert a property in Rhosddu Road into a self-contained apartment and a five-bedroom HMO – which was refused by the council but is now under appeal.

A consultation, which was launched by Wrexham Council at the end of last year and closes on February 19, looks at how the authority handles ‘concentrations’ of HMOs across the county.

A draft version of the ‘local planning guidance note 5: houses in multiple occupation’ made available to view on the council’s website explains how council chiefs intend to assess the proximity of existing HMOs to the site of any proposed new ones.

According to the document HMOs fall into two categories – small (occupied by three to six unrelated people) and large (occupied by seven or more people) and planning permission is required to turn any building into a HMO, as well as to turn a large HMO to a small or vice versa.

The document explains: “Most houses in multiple occupation in the county borough are found in Wrexham town and are predominately located within the wards of Offa, Smithfield, Erddig, Brynyffynnon and Grosvenor.

“Houses in multiple occupation can be of benefit to an area by providing low cost housing solutions for those who may otherwise have difficulty finding a place to live as well as accommodation for students, young professionals and health care workers.

“In fact, the Wrexham Council housing market assessment recognises that there is likely to be a need in the future for smaller units of accommodation in the county borough. HMOs can go some way towards meeting this identified need.

“The housing In multiple occupation review and evidence gathering report published by the Welsh Government in 2015 acknowledged that large concentrations of HMO can result in problems, including damage to social cohesion with higher levels of transient residents and fewer long term households and established families, greater difficulties for owner occupiers and first time buyers because of competition from landlords and a reduction in the number of family homes, increases in noise, crime and anti-social behavior and increase pressure for parking.”

Describing how the placement of HMOs will be assesed in order to avoid over-concentrations in certain areas, it adds: “Planning permission will not normally be granted for a new HMO if, including the property subject to the application, it will result in the number of residential properties in use as a HMOs exceeding 10 per cent (rounded to the nearest
whole number) within a 50 metre radius of the boundaries of the application site.

“The use of a 50 metre radius is considered to be the most appropriate way to assess HMO concentrations because it can be applied consistently to each proposal.

“In addition, to avoid concentrations of HMOs developing within streets, there must be a gap of at least two dwellings or other buildings not in use as a HMO between a proposed HMO and any existing HMOs.”

In terms of other planning requirements, the guidance note states houses in multiple occupation should have a large enough private outdoor area to provide external drying areas, cycle parking and bin storage.

Most HMOs will also need a separate licence from public protection and will be subject to conditions that require landlords to take all reasonable steps to control noise and anti-social behaviour.

To find out more, and to comment, visit www.wrexham. gov.uk/english/planning_portal/ and select ‘planning policy’ then ‘draft supplementary planning guidance notes for consultation’.

Source: The Leader

Marketing No Comments

New Government powers to ban landlords and additional HMO regulations

From April 2018 any landlord convicted for the criminal offences of blackmail, theft,  handling stolen goods, harassment and stalking will automatically be banned from letting out property and added to the new rogue landlords database.

In addition Housing Minister, Alok Sharma, has introduced new HMO regulations set to be passed by Parliament confirming all properties occupied by 5 or more people from 2 or more separate households will face mandatory licensing.

The new HMO regulations will include:

  • Minimum bedroom size requirements (to prevent overcrowding). Rooms used for sleeping by a single adult will have to be no smaller than 6.51sqm, and those occupied by two adults will have to measure at least 10.22sqm. Rooms slept in by children of 10 years and younger will have to be at least 4.64sqm in size.
  • Responsibility falling on landlords to ensure the council’s rules on refuse and recycling are adhered to.
  • Additional powers to be given to local authorities for cracking down on over-crowded and sub-standard homes.

The government has estimated this will bring 160,000 into the licensing regime.

Alok Sharma said: “Every tenant has a right to a safe, secure and decent home, but far too many are being exploited by unscrupulous landlords who profit from providing overcrowded, squalid and sometimes dangerous homes.

“Enough is enough, and so I’m putting these rogue landlords on notice. Shape up or ship out of the rental business. Through a raft of new powers we are giving councils the further tools they need to crack down these rogue landlords and kick them out of the business for good.”

The RLA policy on this was previously spelt out by David Smith saying: “Councils are already struggling to enforce licensing schemes and the extension will potentially triple the number of homes under mandatory licensing.

“What is the point in introducing extra regulations if there are no resources to enforce them?

“Tenants should not be forced into excessively small rooms, but there are cases where tenants have other space available within their properties, which should be taken into account. By concentrating so narrowly on bedroom size the Government could knock thousands of rooms out of the sector, potentially forcing tenants out of their homes.”

Source: Property 118

Marketing No Comments

‘Alarm bells ring’ as councillors examine ‘understaffed’ privately rented HMO licensing

A councillor has described how ‘alarm bells are ringing’ after considering a report on the ‘pressures’ in respect of licensing the private rented HMO sector by Wrexham Council.

The Homes and Environment Scrutiny Committee were examining this report that details the reduction in staff available to regulate housing standards in privately rented houses of multiple occupancy – known as HMO’s.

The staffing reduction over the years is detailed, with 6.9 full time equivalent staff (FTE) dealing with the licensing workload, which is now at 3.15 FTE. The report notes that there is no additional administrative support or an extra Environmental Health Officer post as there was previously.

The recent ‘Difficult Decision’ savings programme is referenced in the report, saying it “…has identified that the Public Protection Service is lean and that any future savings is only likely to be achieved via a shared service with other Local Authorities in a regional or sub-regional model. This in reality will provide additional resilience, but is likely to lead to a reduction in officers.”

Despite the staff cuts, the report states: “The workload for licensing has increased from the last additional licensing scheme.”

Detail was given to the meeting over the five year inspection periods, with an officer explaining that although the five years is the maximum mandatory inspection period, HMOs that are of concern could be inspected much more regularly such as six monthly.

Lead Member for Housing, Cllr D J Griffiths, did point out that it was a chicken and egg situation at times as without investigating properties the council would not know of any issues to deal with, but without the staff to do so then investigations may not be as frequent.

Officers explained how data is being used, such the energy efficiency certificates that are now issued, cross referenced against registered HMO’s to then deduce which could be the coldest properties. Such data is then referenced with possible high risk occupants, and therefore a priority list is created. Council officers were very careful not to criticise the staffing levels, however were clearly uneasy at definitively saying they had enough resources to deal with the possible issues in HMOs.

Cllr Benbow-Jones raised the issue of properties being rented on domestic mortgages: “These would not appear on buy to let lists, do we have an audit of all the homes in the borough?”

The council officer replied: “If anyone is renting a property is needs to be registered. If there is a property being managed or sub managed, they need to have a licence.

“At the moment the last statistics shows 105% of properties registered, which is clearly wrong, but is based on the census of 2011.”

More detail was given on work done to locate unregistered HMOs, including: “There are probably more HMOs than are legally registered, but it is finding them is the challenge. We look at various sources, council tax bills, housing benefit information, or even looking on the internet to see what is to let locally.”

Cllr Griffiths said: “If you know of people abusing the system, then let us know.”

Cllr Alun Jenkins thanked officers for a ‘very honest report’, adding: “The picture presented has set alarm bells ringing. I knew there were problems but did not know the extent. The bottom end of the private rented sector is dire.”

Comparisons were made about the huge Housing Revenue Account budget inside Wrexham Council that is managed by a sizeable team, and looks after around 11,000 council houses. Cllr Jenkins pointed out that with data given ‘there is a small team that works their socks off on the private rented sector’ looking after 11,000 houses.

“It is a dire story in the decline of the staff numbers. We have to do it because of austerity, but we are asking too much of the officers there. They can’t cope with the size of the problem.

“There are so many properties that are privately rented operating below the radar. We are working on percentages, but we do not know the total numbers, and we can’t find out. The small team simply does not have the resources to locate all the private rented property in Wrexham.”

Cllr Jenkins gave anecdotal evidence on how private rental issues are brought forward to the council with a response of “it was not registered therefore we didn’t know about it” being given as a reply.

Cllr Griffiths said: “I won’t disagree with what Cllr Jenkins has said.”

Cllr Skelland briefly spoke to say he was unaware of any HMO’s in Bronington (his ward) ‘thank goodness’, adding such issues “must be demoralising.”

Cllr Graham Rogers enquired about enforcement methods, and what actions are taken against landlords. In a detailed answer a council officer explained the various levels of intervention, adding an overview of a recent case where a landlord who was in prison had a property with a broken boiler – padlocked away so unfixable. The meeting was told the landlord in question has got a Christmas present from the council, a large bill.

Chairman of the meeting Cllr Paul Pemberton voiced his concern at the ‘understaffing’, and said: “With the under the radar properties, do you feel if you had more staff you could investigate that further?

“My concern is if you have properties under the radar we could have major health and safety issues, problems with flues, carbon monoxide and the like and we would not know.”

“I applaud what you are doing, and do not envy the department. I feel a machete has been put on offices and the department to cut rather than a stanley knife. This could be a major health and safety issue.”

The officer replied: “If there was more staff we would have more resources to identify properties.”

Councillors then shared various snippets of information from either what they had encountered on planning committees or in their wards. Cllr Rodgers observed: “We get registered social landlords not bringing their properties up to standard, then they have the audacity to submit more planning applications.”

Cllr Jenkins told the meeting there were ‘a number of HMOs in the town centre with no licence for more than three months, they are amongst the worst we have’.

Councillors looked to form a recommendation, led by Cllr Jenkins, settling on thanking officers for the report, with additional recommendations to restore staffing to two years ago and oppose any moves to share the service with another authority to save money. These recommendations were unanimously approved.

Interestingly in the meeting the council officer pointed to the Rent Smart Wales website as it has a public register that you can pop an address in and see if it is registered, and who the agent is (if there is one) – you can find the form here.

Source: Wrexham.com

Marketing No Comments

Government inspector overturns decision to use new legislation to stop expansion of student house in Falmouth

Proposals to change a bungalow into a house of multiple occupation (HMO) in Falmouth that fell foul of new legislation have been allowed on appeal.

Dylan Stephens already houses five people at the house in Dracaena Avenue, but had to apply for planning permission to increase the number to nine.

He said he was only applying “under protest” as he has operated it as an HMO for 14 years, but Cornwall Council turned it down.

Although any HMO for more than five people has always had to seek planning consent, Article 4 legislation, which came into force in June, means schemes can be refused if it is felt the area is at saturation point.

Despite being recommended for approval by planning officer Laura Potts, Cornwall Council’s planning committee used the policy to refuse it saying the area “was identified as containing a large number of HMOs”.

But Mr Stephens appealed both the change of use and a second application to add a loft extension. The first was upheld, but the planning inspector refused the extension because of the impact on neighbours.

Mr Stephens said in his application: “The deeds for the property state it can be used as a residential house or high-quality boarding house. Falmouth has an enormous demand for shared accommodation without the need to take up any more of the much-needed family housing.

“It has housed many local working people who have been unable to afford to live in a self-contained unit.”

The application received objections from residents, who raised concerns about the provision of just four parking spaces and suggesting it would increase noise problems already experienced from the premises.

One objector said: “It has already been enlarged to six bedrooms, that’s a 200% increase. To enlarge it even further to nine bedrooms would be 350%. That is massive over-development and overcrowding of a small site.”

Falmouth Town Council also objected to the application, saying it was over-development and unneighbourly and went against the emerging neighbourhood plan and Article 4 directive.

Planning inspector Chris Cheswell said, however, that as it was already being used as an HMO there was no change and therefore the Article 4 direction did not apply.

He said: “I am aware of the neighbouring occupier’s concerns regarding potential noise and disturbance. Although I do sympathise with these concerns, the property is already in use as HMO and it is not clear that an increase of three additional persons would materially change the existing situation.

“While I am aware of some previous complaints, there is relatively little before me to demonstrate that noise is an ongoing problem. Indeed, I note that the council’s environmental protection officer has no objection to the proposal.”

The property has a two-storey extension at the back and a single-storey extension is currently under construction having previously gained permission, but the inspector dismissed the second appeal for a loft extension because he said it would be overbearing and affect the living conditions of neighbours.

“Although I recognise that the proposal would provide a modest amount of additional accommodation within the town, this is not sufficient to balance in favour of the development.”

Source: Cornwall Live

Marketing No Comments

Council urged to “rethink” Fife town’s HMO policy

The findings of Dr Ross Brown’s study suggest that the growing levels of ‘studentification’ in private residential areas and HMO policy changes could be having a significant impact on residential areas of the town. It says that this could lead to lower levels of owner-occupied properties, restrictions in housing for local residents, house price inflation, and an increased tension between the university and local residents.

The study follows data released last month, which showed that since 2011 Fife Council had issued 753 HMO licences within St Andrews. Speaking about the findings, Dr Brown said: “Large concentration of HMO within the local housing markets can have highly complex and counterproductive effects for local communities.” He added that this could have: “Longer term implications for the long viability of public services, causing feels of anxiety and disempowerment with in the local community.” Dr Brown said the partial moratorium implemented by Fife Council could be having “unintended negative consequences” and called for an “urgent rethink”. He said: “It should impose a comprehensive moratorium across the whole of the town on new HMOs. With the exception of student housing and halls of residence, no further private sector HMOs should be licenced until the council has devised a proper, coherent and evidence-based planning and housing strategy for St Andrews.”

Helen Wilkie, housing manager for Fife Council, said: “A moratorium was introduced in St Andrews town centre in 2011 and in 2016 we commissioned an independent assessment of this approach. “In January we’ll be holding a workshop with councillors to look at the consultants’ findings and explore options for the future. We hope to report to committee with proposals as early as February.” The council added that while the moratorium means no new planning applications for HMOs are granted in the town centre, existing licences have to be renewed every three years or re-issued to new owners who buy a licenced property. Each licence that’s issued is classed as a new licence even if it is for an existing house of multiple occupation.

Source: Fife Today

Marketing No Comments

Property Portfolio Riddled With Problems Lands Landlord With Fine

A landlord has been landed with a £6,439 fine after four of the homes in his £1.5 million property portfolio were found to pose safety concerns.

Magistrates inspected two of the homes let by landlord Dilip Gohil, 67. They found that they posed fire safety concerns, and lacked escape routes in case of a fire.

Furthermore, none of the homes in the property portfolio were licensed with Nottingham City Council. According to Sarah Mills, prosecuting, the authority sent out letters informing landlords that houses in multiple occupation (HMO) required five-year licences, costing £910.

A three story house in The Meadows was found by council officers to contain seven bedrooms with five tenants who shared a kitchen and a bathroom. The property did not have the correct licensing for a HMO. A second property, also located in The Meadows, had six bedrooms with three tenants, each paying around £70 per week for a room. It also did not have a licence and contained several fire safety threats.

Miss Mills explained to the court: ‘There was a lack of fire doors throughout the property, the kitchen door did not have a handle and could not be closed. There was a fridge stored in the hallway which provided access to the bathroom, kitchen and rear door.’

A further property owned by Gohil was located in Wilford Crescent East. Inspectors found a six-bedroom house without a licence, and with issues such as a kitchen door that failed to close, which affected the integrity of the fire door and its ability to contain fire and smoke for 30 minutes’ according to Miss Mills.

A final house on the street owned by Gohil also had no licence and issues with fire detectors.

Miss Mills concluded: ‘A large refrigerator was in the hallway outside the kitchen. Smoke detectors were not linked so occupants on the first and second floor would not receive adequate early warning in the event of a fire.”

Gohil admitted to seven breaches of the Housing Act and was fined £4,750. He was also ordered to pay £1,519 council costs and a government tax of £170.

John Campbell, mitigating, told magistrates: ‘He has rectified all the matters subject of these offences. He has applied for licences for all the properties. He didn’t need to be prosecuted to leap into action. The purpose is to maintain standards and safety and that has been served.’

Source: Residential Landlord

Marketing No Comments

Potters Bar Landlord Fined Nearly £7,000 For Failing To Obtain HMO Licence

A Potters Bar landlord is facing a fine of nearly £7,000 after he failed to obtain the correct HMO licence for his rental property.

Andrew Harvey avoided paying the £500 licence fee, leaving him with a bill of over ten times this when Hertsmere Borough Council bought legal action against him.

Harvey appeared at St Alban’s Magistrates Court on Wednesday 22 November due to his failure to obtain a HMO Licence for the rental property he let, located on Oakfield Close. The property had been operating without a licence from March 2012 to June 2017. The court was told that Harvey, 50, from Stevenage, avoided all contact from the borough council, failing to respond to emails and other correspondence on multiple occasions. Harvey defended himself by claiming that he had not received the emails from the council.

When sentencing the Potters Bar landlord, magistrates said they believed Harvey should have been aware anyway that his property was meant to be licenced. It was therefore his duty to ensure that the correct licensing for the property had been obtained.

It is a criminal offence for anyone to control or manage a house with three or more storeys which is occupied by five or more people in more than one household without a licence.

An inspection by the council’s private sector housing officer in June revealed five veterinary students living in the home.

Harvey was fined £5,542 and was also ordered to pay £1,319.29 in costs, as well a £125 victim surcharge.

A House in Multiple Occupation licence costs just £542 for five years, proving that in aiming to avoid the licence fee Harvey was in fact subjecting hiself to a far higher fare.

Portfolio holder for housing, Councillor Jean Heywood, said: ‘Everybody has a right to live in decent accommodation, and the council takes its responsibilities to enforce basic living standards very seriously. As a landlord, you are responsible for the welfare of your tenants and there are strict rules in place to ensure certain conditions and duties are met. This is for the protection of all. The vast majority of landlords are happy to work with us to ensure they are managing their properties and looking after their tenants according to the letter of law. However, we will not hesitate to take other landlords who deliberately fail in their duties to court, where they could receive unlimited fines.’

Source: Residential Landlord

Marketing No Comments

Houses in Multiple Occupation, two storeys or three?

Legislation relating to Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) has long existed to ensure landlords follow the necessary requirements when renting out properties to multiple people. All HMOs are subject to legislation about how they are managed and certain larger HMOs (3-storeys or more with 5 or more occupants) are required to have a license.

In the recent case of Woking BC v Johnson (unreported), 10 October 2017, (QB (Administrative Court)), a two-storey self-contained flat situated above a restaurant was occupied by more than five people who did not form part of the same household. Whilst it was clear that this was indeed an HMO, the question for the magistrates was whether the property fell within the description of an HMO, which was required under the statutory scheme to be licensed.

Article 3(3) of the Licensing of Houses in Multiple Occupation (Prescribed Descriptions) (England) Order 2006 (SI 2006/371) provides that a property requires a license where:

  • It is occupied by five or more people.
  • The HMO or any part of it comprises three storeys or more.
  • It is occupied by persons living in two or more households.

The local authority alleged that the respondent had committed an offence under section 72 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) by failing to obtain an HMO license in respect of the property. The local authority argued that the restaurant (below the flats) should be included within the number of storeys considered when calculating the requirements under Article 3(3). The magistrates relied on the decision in Islington LBC v Unite Group Plc [2013] EWHC 508 (Admin) in which it was decided that it was the HMO itself that had to comprise three storeys and not the building in which it was situated. The magistrates decided that the restaurant did not form part of the HMO and therefore did not require a license. The local authority appealed by way of case stated.

The issue for the High Court was whether the magistrates had been correct to exclude the restaurant when calculating the number of storeys.

The appeal was subsequently allowed by the High Court. It was held that the magistrates should not have relied on Islington LBC v Unite Group Plc as the circumstances differed to the present case. In Islington, the property comprised a five-storey block of purpose built self-contained flats. The ground floor consisted of a shop and the four upper floors were residential accommodation. Most such accommodation was in the form of cluster flats with four to six bedrooms with en-suite bathrooms and a communal living room and kitchen. Each flat was on one storey. The cluster flats were each a house in multiple occupation (HMO) within the meaning of the Housing Act 2004. In contrast, in the present case the property was a two-storey self-contained flat above a commercial premises.

The correct approach should have followed the explanatory note to the Licensing of Houses in Multiple Occupation (Prescribed Descriptions) (England) Order 2006, which requires that commercial premises above or below living accommodation, except where they were located in the basement, should count towards the calculation of storeys.

Source: Lexology

Marketing No Comments

HMO plans for vacant Rhosddu property rejected by councillors

Plans to convert a property into Rhosddu into a HMO have been rejected by councillors.

The application to convert the property at 36 Rhosddu Road into a one bedroom self-contained flat and a five bedroom HMO (House Multiple Occupation) was submitted to Wrexham Council in September 2017.

The property is described in the application’s design and access statement as a three storey, Victorian mid-terrace dwelling that has been vacant for sometime and lies in a state of disrepair.

At present the building consists of a living room, dining room and a former kitchen and shower room at basement level. Two bedrooms and a further kitchen area are on the ground floor entrance level and a further three bedrooms and bathroom at the first level.

However the plans put forward proposed a remodelling of the building, along with converting the basement into a one bedroom apartment and the first and ground floors into a five bedroom HMO.

The proposals had been recommended for approval, with planning officer David Williams stating the committee would need to evaluate if “one additional HMO in that building would adversely affect the character” of that area.

In terms of approving the application, councillors told that the key consideration related to the concentration of HMOs in a 50m radius and if it goes over a 10% threshold. In this case there is already in excess of 14% of HMO properties and if the application was approved it would take the percentage to 17%.

Mr Williams said: “We need to look at the circumstances relating to that site, there is already a concentrated cluster.

“It is an area of mixed-use, it is not primarily residential and I think if you were looking to refuse, you need to be asking how one additional HMO would alter the character of that area given it would be sandwiched either side by an existing HMO.

“We have obtained information with the Council Tax records and it appears the property has been unoccupied since 2011, so it provides and opportunity to bring a beneficial use back into the building.

“I appreciate we are still working on new guidance for HMOs, so I don’t think it is something we can use at this point to justify the determination of this applications.

“We have tended to use the 10% figure in the past, in this case would accept it goes beyond the 10% limit. Again we need to look at the individual circumstances on the site and as an individual case.”

He added: “I think you need to ask yourself how one additional HMO in that building would adversely affect the character of the area.”

However Grovsenor Cllr Marc Jones described the situation with HMOs as “frustrating” and a “catch 22”, with the committee told previously that they could not refuse an application on the basis of not hitting the 10% threshold. However in this instance councillors were being told that “one more won’t make a difference”.

Cllr Jones said: “I want to give a background on the location. It is important people understand it is a very built area, it is mixed and I would challenge the view that it is not primarily residential.

“This block of five terrace houses directly overlooks Rhosddu Park and is adjacent to the cemetery. We have had a PSPO (Public Space Protection Area) to prevent people engaging in antisocial behaviour in place for a couple of years, with limited success, but that is as a result of concerns people have had about antisocial behaviour in this area.

“There have been public meetings and has been significant concerns in terms of police activity and because of that I am struggling really to understand the logic behind this.

“Given the concerns that have been reflected locally, I think Planning Policy H4 is clear and worth reading in its entirety and the last clause – the sub division of dwellings will only be permitted when a proposal would not result in the over concentration of HMOs to the detriment of crime levels, social fabric of the area and amenity of existing residents.

“That is fairly concise and clear cut. I don’t think we need to look any further.”

He added: “The idea that one more doesn’t make a difference, it does – one more makes huge difference. We have to be careful in ways we deal with the individual planning applications, there is a bigger picture we have to address.

“I am here to represent the concerns of residents in Rhosddu. I think there is a danger that we could set a dangerous precedent that landlords who have long-term empty dwellings feel they can get away with anything if they leave a dwelling empty long enough. It is a dangerous precedent to set.

“On the basis of Policy H4 I recommend refusal. It goes against our policy and think there is a very clear case.”

The recommendation for refusal was seconded by Cllr Paul Pemberton, who said he agreed that there are too many HMOs in such a small area.

Cllr I David Bithell, who represents the neighbouring Stansty ward, added: “There are too many HMOs and too much antisocial behaviour. Police are supporting us to try and reduce it and I think we need to make a stand.

“I am disappointed with the planning officer for recommending approval. I thought he would be supporting us on refusal.”

Members of the committee voted unanimously for refusing the application.

Source: Wrexham.com