AIBU to refuse a tenant's vulnerable guest staying in my HMO?

OP be firm and repeat to your tenant you will evict him due to breaching his tenancy agreement if she returns to your property. Is your tenant involved with drugs as well? Put a camera on the front door to check who enters. There are agencies who will help the homeless

You do not run an HMO for low income families like a charity. Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Of course the police weren’t happy because they want you to solve their problem for them. We used to get this with the police at a hostel for homeless residents. The police often turned up late at night and tried to get us to take in people who had no leave to remain in the country and were awaiting removal from the UK. We were a hostel for homeless local residents, not an immigration holding centre. They should have been dealing with it themselves not passing it off on us and because we were not able to prevent them leaving, they would just walk out never to be seen again. The police should have been taking them to a secure immigration centre but didn’t want the hassle. Definitely push back with the police because they will try to tell you that you have to take people in who are not your responsibility.

I lived in HMOs for years, many people can't afford to live on their own. It's already pressured sharing communal space with strangers, it's not fair on the other tenants if there's an extra person and the related tenant doesn't even want them there - you need to support the tenants, not a random person who is trying to join for free!

The police just wanted a quick solution, they don't know and won't want to know the implications as a landlord. Response officers in my experience push for all sorts of unsuitable solutions for a quick fix especially on a night shift (in social work - agreeing to missing teens staying places they really shouldn't, for ex partners to stay when they shouldn't be at the property, or pushing for them to stay at vulnerable family members homes) It doesn't mean it's your issue to fix - your responsibility is to your actual tenants.

No you don't, what?

Is tenant also vulnerable? Why are they not saying no, as it will jeopardise their tenancy. Yanbu, this person is not your responsibility amd they have taken advantage of your previous acquiescence.

Haha
No you don't

Yep I'd say so. It's not actually for them to have an opinion on whether OP allows someone to stay or not, and if they care that much I'm sure they've all got sofas or floors she could kip on.

You can’t go against the law of your HMO set up, whether or not the police think it’s ’unfair’ is not your concern. Direct the police to the law, junior officers don’t know every aspect of housing and tenancy law, speak to a senior officer at the station, in fact I would go down there and explain the whole situation so it is logged and any further contacts with the police can be directed back to your statement. It might also help to trigger some sort of action for this woman, homeless charity signposting or something like that. I would also write to the council and cc your mp in. You need this out of your concern and put in the hands of the proper authorities. Essentially they are palming her off to you right now an d it’s not your concern to deal with. Your contract is with the council and your tenant, nothing to do with this woman who has somehow now become your concern when she shouldn’t be.

Ah I run mine more like a charity. I think if you're going to provide a basic human need like housing, you kind of have to. Each to their own, though.

But you are clearly not in the OPs position.
Being a landlord is a nightmare, who would do it these days ?
She cannot be responsible for this person. It's not about charity, it's about running a business, keeping her other tenants safe and being landed with severe consequences if she does not.
Ps. Laws are there to protect the whole, not one single loopy individual.

What BeEagerRubyBird said

Ha ha, I was just coming on to say exactly the same. You couldn't make it up 😂

You’re right to not let her stay, she needs specialist help.
But you’re wrong to threaten your existing tenant with eviction, especially as it’s not easy to evict anyone anymore.

Well you sound like you don't know what you are talking about.

Of course the OP is involved, it is her property!

Why do you assume HMOs house people who are of worse character than the local residents? They are the local residents. Just ones that don't have anywhere to live.

Yup.

Surely the woman has no rights to be there at all so the council are well out of order.

Abide by the law, OP, and ignore all the pressure from the 'be kind' brigade. It will be your head (bank balance) on the block if the authorities take action against you, any 'advisors' will have long since disappeared.

Just because someone is vulnerable does not mean they are safe, and I'd say that this woman is both vulnerable and a danger/nuisance whatever. But - she's not your problem and don't allow your tenant, the police or anyone make her so.

You will have to play the bad guy. As others have said, tell your tenant he will be evicted if he lets her stay again. Why should he suffer for her? Why should you?

So normal people aren’t allowed to want a family home in Leyton because they don’t have money to live in a “naice” area? I might be biased because I live in a similar area in London. When I bought it was an ok street, and was what I could afford. Since I bought, 4 HMOs have become my neighbours and it’s totally changed the fabric of the street. But hey, they probably improved the area because it wasn’t posh to start with 🤷‍♀️

This was my first post.

"Id not throw out a vulnurable woman on the streets, no."

@VointofPiew rules and laws exist for a reason. Your rush to be "kind" to some individuals is very unkind on their housemates and the larger area. No-one likes a dodgy HMO landlord who thinks the rules are for other mugs.

It's in Leyton. Honestly it probably improved the area

@VointofPiew I’m not a landlord (not my thing, I don’t feel a need to own extra properties, nor do I have enough money, like you clearly do), but I imagine the rules are quite strict. OP has said that an extra person will take her over a certain threshold that requires additional registration/licensing, which presumably she doesn’t have. That would surely mean that she wouldn’t be complying with regulations eg fire, for example. So the entire property and the other tenants’ contracts are at risk.

I think it’s wrong of you to stand in judgement of someone who is trying to run a business, and I also think that if you have such a heart of gold, you should run your extra house (or houses) as free hostels. Put your money where your mouth is, rather than telling OP that she should risk her livelihood by breaking the rules.

You rent to people on low income/benefits via the council who pay you above the odds rent and guarantee your rent payments even in void periods. It's great that you do this as the council needs private properties like this but don't make out you're taking a rent cut or doing it from the goodness of your heart.