Blog | HMO | Student Housing

HMO investment: The impact of Article 4

Undergraduates have moved into areas of Britain’s big cities ripping the heart out of our communities and leaving devastation’ (The Independent 2004). This seems slightly unfair but there is no mistaking that a conflict exists between students and local residents due to the studentification of neighbourhoods throughout the country.

The problem is students need a place to live and there simply isn’t enough purpose built accommodation to house them. Regardless, living in a house of multiple occupation (HMO) is part of the student experience and always will be. For the past 35 years, private landlords have been capitalising on what feels to be an ever increasing need for student bedrooms. They have been converting former family homes into HMOs and unintentionally created areas that many refer to as student ‘ghettos’.

There are two significant issues with these ‘ghettos’. Firstly, the areas lack any sense of community spirit, they are transient and without a sense of ownership. There’s an average of six students to a house causing parking chaos, untidy streets and anti-social behaviour. Secondly, there is a housing shortage and it is perceived by many that these areas should be returned to family occupation.

Under the General Permitted Development Order property owners can convert a C3 family house into a C4 HMO without planning permission and vice versa. In 2010 the government stepped in, delegating power to local authorities, allowing them to enforce – by their own discretion – an Article 4 Direction. The Article 4 direction prevents a change of use without planning consent.

Since then, many local authorities have implemented Article 4 zones. Cities with a significant student presence, such as Manchester, have utilised the power very quickly, with a host of towns and cities following suit, including smaller university destinations such as Falmouth.

But for student investors, what has been the impact?

Confusion

If you are acquiring student houses in multiple towns and cities, understanding the restraints imposed by the Article 4 direction can create confusion. This is because there are no set Article 4 guidelines or a standardised approach to managing dense student populations. As a result, all local authorities are implementing the Article 4 direction differently, with some enforcing it more strictly than others. It is also important to understand that local authorities are using Article 4 to achieve different outcomes. Some may wish to completely eliminate students from a particular area; others are trying to create a more balanced community, whereas some simply want to exercise an element of control.

Crystallisation of HMO numbers

Generally speaking, investors have stopped buying C3 properties in the hope of achieving C4 status within Article 4 zones because the risk is perceived to be too great. As a result, we have witnessed a crystallisation of HMO numbers. The issue for investors is the lack of opportunities to add value.  These opportunities are restricted to operating HMOs requiring refurbishment or those that provide an opportunity to extend.

Value of C4 properties

C4 values are strengthening because of the shift in supply and demand; whilst the requirement for HMO accommodation is increasing, the number of new C4 properties coming to the market is constrained by Article 4. Conversely C3 values in these areas have generally plateaued. Market competition for C3 properties has diminished significantly since investor appetite has waned, creating a widening gap between the value of a house with C3 use and the value of a house with C4 use.

We have seen examples whereby C4 houses are now achieving in excess of 50% more value than an identical C3 house. For investors therefore, investments are becoming more expensive and yields are hardening.

Rents

HMOs remain popular amongst students despite the constant growth of the purpose built sector and the amenities they offer. Rents have therefore continued to grow and will do into the future as a result of continued demand by students, against the stunted growth of HMOs in light of Article 4.

Portfolios

We are witnessing a growing debate: portfolio ‘discount’ vs portfolio ‘premiums’. If an investor is acquiring 15 HMOs, should they be benefitting from a discount for their bulk acquisition? This is standard investment; many would argue they should.

The problem is, it’s not so simple with HMO investments anymore. Article 4 has added spice to the argument. If the value of C4 houses is increasing (as we have already established they are), and opportunities to create more C4 houses are limited, then perhaps an investor should pay a premium for a portfolio offering operational HMOs. It would make sense because the ability to create a portfolio of 15 C4 houses has grown ever more difficult.

Conclusion

The government set out to give local authorities more power to control the studentification of their towns and cities and we have seen many implement the Article 4 direction since its introduction. The rationale behind its use differs among local authorities, so it is impossible to say if Article 4 can be judged a success at a local level.

However, it is fair to say that most were hoping to achieve a better demographic balance and revive a sense of community in areas that had become transient and home to a large population of students. In reality many of these areas, dubbed student ‘ghettos’ still exist. Streets with abandoned homes during academic holidays, where there are no Christmas lights at Christmas time and homes with overgrown gardens and over-spilling bins are plentiful. Permanent residents in these areas probably feel little has been achieved. If anything, owner occupiers could feel disheartened by the value of their C3 dwelling in contrast to C4 properties close by.

For investors, it may be more difficult to seek good opportunities now than it once was, but their stock is on the rise. Whilst these investors may have benefited from Article 4, I’m not convinced local communities really have.

Contact

If you would like to get in touch with Vicky, please contact her:

vicky.bingham@allsop.co.uk or +44 (0)113 236 6682


Related Insights

Getting ahead of the budget - The politics and economics podcast
Podcast 28/02/24

Getting ahead of the budget - The politics and economics podcast

Auction | The Property Market

In our second podcast of the year, Auctioneers George Walker and Richard Adamson have a candid chat with Seb Verity, Allsop’s...

Allsop raises over £51m in February residential auction
News 19/02/24

Allsop raises over £51m in February residential auction

Residential Auction | Residential Property

7 lots were sold for over £1m, including a semi-detached building in Shepherd’s Bush for £1.28m

Allsop raises £47m from the sale of 52 lots across the UK in commercial auction
News 14/02/24

Allsop raises £47m from the sale of 52 lots across the UK in commercial auction

Commercial Auction | Auction

£47m raised at a success rate of 80% in February commercial auction Largest lot sold was Larkswood Retail Park in Chingford ...

Allsop residential auction on trends, predictions, risks and more…
Blog 13/02/24

Allsop residential auction on trends, predictions, risks and more…

Auction | Residential Auction

This month Property Auction News interviewed Richard Adamson partner and residential auctioneer about his thoughts on his mar...