HMO rules will split up low-paid 'family'

Jim Hewitt with, from left, Amorindo Hermenegildo, Jorge dos Santos and Alarica dos Santos Jim Hewitt with, from left, Amorindo Hermenegildo, Jorge dos Santos and Alarica dos Santos

A CHURCH leader has criticised Oxford City Council for shared housing rules which are set to divide a “family” of low-paid workers.

The Diocese of Oxford’s David Mason spoke after one of its tenants was told he could no longer provide a home for up to five adults.

Jim Hewitt, 68, said he has taken people into his three-bedroom house with diocese permission to ease pressure on city homes for 15 years.

But he can now only let two people stay at his Monks Close, Blackbird Leys home, under the city’s 2011 Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) regime.

The rules state that homes with three or more non-related people must get a HMO licence from the council.

Mr Mason – diocese director of Glebe and buildings – said: “If the city council is choosing to interpret the HMO regulations in such a restrictive way it will prevent people like Mr Hewitt, who have a heart to support those who are less able to support themselves, from being able to provide a safe family environment on affordable terms.”

Mr Hewitt – last year awarded an MBE for his community work – has mostly taken in people from Timor, south east Asia.

There are currently two people in one bedroom, two each have their own room and a fifth person who sleeps in the living room. They share the £580 a month rent equally.

Related links

He said: “I have to tell the people I regard as my family that their willingness to live here as a household and family is not acceptable.”

Mr Hewitt said: “Regulations intended to protect the vulnerable are being used to break up strong relational households and drive people into the rent-for-profit market.”

He said it contrasted with the Government’s “bedroom tax”, where social housing tenants face a cut in housing benefit if they have “spare” bedrooms.

He said: “On the one hand the Government is saying ‘you must make full use of your house, there will be penalties if you don’t’.

“Then they are saying to me ‘you should under-occupy your house’.”

Timorese cleaner Jorge Dos Santos, 35, said: “We are all brothers here and it will be a great shame to split up.”

The HMO regime was introduced in a bid to clamp down on low-quality shared homes.

The council estimates there are 5,000 HMOs, of which 551 have been licensed and 2,709 are awaiting a decision. Some 33 landlords have been taken to court or given a formal caution.

Council spokeswoman Louisa Dean said: “The council would be more than happy to licence the property but neither Mr Hewitt nor the Diocese of Oxford appear willing to apply.”

Mr Hewitt helped run the Blackbird Leys Credit Union for 20 years and used to be a community worker with the Holy Family Church in Cuddesdon Way.

Comments(8)

Lord Palmerstone says...
7:37am Wed 20 Mar 13

HMO is totally a displacement activity to enable the City Council to take on more staff-at our expense-and pretend that it's doing something worthwhile
But the voters in the City aren't going to replace the horrible morass of Labour and Social Democrat (mini Labour, Liberal, call it what you will) with members of mature parties and this nonsense is going to continue. Frankly, you deserve it if you've not the guts to get rid of it.

mytaxes says...
7:54am Wed 20 Mar 13

I totally agree.

HMO Enforcement Team Manager Job No. 03819
Grade 9, Salary Per Annum: £38,042 with possible progression to £40,741 – pay award pending
Contract: Permanent 37 hours per week


HMO Enforcement Officer (x6 Posts) (Job No: 03485)
Grade 6: £25,854 to £29,066 salary per annum
Contract: Permanent 37 hours per week Closing Date: 5th April 2013

Myron Blatz says...
9:00am Wed 20 Mar 13

City Council for once has got it right - over the years, Oxford has becomes riddled with dubious private landlords, many of whom charge outrageous rents - especially for rooms and bedsits. Added to which, people who take in lodgers in their homes, but don't have vasic health, safety or fire precautions, and often don't pay tax on the money they get from letting rooms. As for churches getting involved and speaking out against City Council, I don't see the Anglicans or any other faith in Oxford converting unused churches into cheap, humane and safe accommodation. As for Mr Hewitt? Well he might have done a lot of social and voluntary work, but he's still renting-out for financial gain, and should be paying tax on that income, as well as providing decent public accommodation as a landlord - though having been awarded an MBE for his community work, am sure he does. Registration and knowing where people live is also one way to crack-down on the illegal immigrants in Oxford and addressing the 'people trafficking' as reported in the Oxford Mail. City Council's HMO regulation isn't really aimed at ordinary people with the odd lodger, but the dubious 'black market' landlords who run property across Oxford for profit and financial gain.

online_reader says...
11:59am Wed 20 Mar 13

I do think that Mr Hewitt ought to apply for a licence as something does have to be done about the numerous dodgy landlords and the same rules must apply to everyone; sadly administering them does cost money.

Is there a reason why he has not applied? What are the costs involved? Is he simply objecting because he believes he's a decent chap and shouldn't be subjected to rules aimed at curtailing rogues? I think this story needs a bit more detail.

Lord Palmerstone says...
1:24pm Wed 20 Mar 13

There's plenty of legislation , pre-dating this nasty bureaucratic authoritarianism from the Blairbrown train crash to "get" duff landlords. And there is the "Rent a Room tax disregard

Andrew:Oxford says...
1:35pm Wed 20 Mar 13

online_reader wrote:
I do think that Mr Hewitt ought to apply for a licence as something does have to be done about the numerous dodgy landlords and the same rules must apply to everyone; sadly administering them does cost money.

Is there a reason why he has not applied? What are the costs involved? Is he simply objecting because he believes he's a decent chap and shouldn't be subjected to rules aimed at curtailing rogues? I think this story needs a bit more detail.
Shouldn't it be the property owner (the Diocese) that applies for the HMO?

It may be an inconvenience, but the church shouldn't be above the law.

Johno3 says...
7:40pm Wed 20 Mar 13

I am a tenant in a HMO licensed house and I must say I think the scheme is ridiculous. My landlord has a HMO license yet he was still allowed to cause numerous gas leaks, allow the state of the house to deteriorate immensely and to allow unqualified tradesmen into the house.

I have reported him repeatedly to the HMO department at the council and have received nothing. What do these HMO enforcement officers do all day?

HMO is just making it harder for young working professionals to find somewhere to live and therefore giving more license to those landlords with a HMO license to charge obscene rents. I don't want to live in a house with horrible fire doors, various ugly fire alarms and fire blankets attached to the walls, but I am forced to do so as a 26 year old professional living with friends.

jockox3 says...
4:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13

So it's a tax on good landlords and insufficient to really root out the bad ones. Especially where the primary occupant is still living there and taking people in like lodgers why should he not have whoever he likes to share his home for however long?

It took them 16 years to develop these rules and they were wrong from the launch. Why do we accept that these people have some right to make rules by which we must live. They're not competent, as Acton said, “The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern.”

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree