HMOs might yield more – but at what cost?

Posted on 12 Nov

It’s a funny old world. When I was at my busiest, the type of properties that investors now actively seek out were considered sub-prime and to be avoided.

Specifically, these include student lets, lets to sharers, sitting/assured tenancies and Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs).

A corollary of the rush into buy-to-let is that many now see BTL as a way of augmenting their income.

Certainly in London most of the ‘total return’ on BTL has come from capital appreciation, but elsewhere income has become important, and possible.

But as yields have suffered, especially in the last five years off the back of unprecedented and market distorting low interest rates, those seeking income have moved into alternative asset classes.

Many would say student housing has been over-played. However, we all know that many renters are now forced to share houses – which has made HMOs look particularly attractive.

This has not gone unnoticed by the authorities, which have brought in a raft of changes, including licensing schemes.

The result will be a step-change in the number of HMOs being registered – but is there a hidden issue here that doesn’t seem to be talked about?

An HMO has historically been considered as being worth less than a standard residential property, being valued up to 25% less.

Once designated as an HMO the local authority would resist the change back to residential because the new rooms within an HMO each count towards their precious number of available ‘dwellings’.

Indeed I used to do deals for clients where we’d buy a centrally placed property with an HMO use, then buy another in a less salubrious part of the same borough, transfer the use and hey presto, a significant uplift on the more valuable property was realised when a reversion to straight residential was granted.

Recently, I sat in front of a highly placed government official with some responsibility in the area of drawing up new legislation, and asked if the same rules would still apply, i.e. that change of use back to residential after a new HMO licence would be resisted – and they weren’t able to answer.

Anyone thinking of venturing into this area should carefully consider their options, or at least ask the right questions.

Losing a large chunk of capital value to gain a slightly higher yield might just be too high a price to pay.

- Written by Ed Mead

This article first appeared on www.propertyindustryeye.com

Remote control

Posted on 15 Jan.

Some our best loves brands and businesses run fully or partially remotely, without a centralised office. Viewber is just one of them!

Liverpool’s property market update

Posted on 08 Jan.

The pace at which Liverpool adds to its residential, commercial and leisure sectors is keeping this iconic city fresh in the minds of home movers and property investors.

We had Viewber bookings on Christmas & New Years!

Posted on 06 Jan.

Property professionals - we are here to fill in the gaps for your service (especially as we head forwards into a much busier market)

Our website uses cookies which are small files of letters and numbers that we put on your computer. These cookies allow us to distinguish you from other users of our website, which helps us to provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also helps us to improve our website. Read more about the cookies we use by clicking here. By clicking CONTINUE you agree to cookies being used in accordance with our Cookie Policy. If you don't agree you can disable cookies - see the Cookie Policy for more details.