As I said , most. If it is unusually large and could be reconfigured to add another bedroom while ensuring compliance with minimum size regs then it's a runner. Simply squeezing in an en-suite is unlikely to qualify.
As I said , most. If it is unusually large and could be reconfigured to add another bedroom while ensuring compliance with minimum size regs then it's a runner. Simply squeezing in an en-suite is unlikely to qualify.It very much depends on the property; but I do know of some property owners who have reconfigured apartments. Non-purpose built is easier.
That's an interesting thought because there's only one bathroom.As I said , most. If it is unusually large and could be reconfigured to add another bedroom while ensuring compliance with minimum size regs then it's a runner. Simply squeezing in an en-suite is unlikely to qualify.
Hmmm, just considering your question... I did not request legal advice on the specific question of RPZ rules applying to the type of tenant (U.S. corp in this instance). However, the management (letting) company we have used for 10+ years manage well in excess of 1,000 units on behalf of small landlords such as myself. They are not an auctioneering business, they focus on lettings only. I want to check myself saying this but.... I would expect them to "know" the RPZ rules... but I will put this question to our solicitor and revert next week once he has responded.I am not saying your property management company or accountant are wrong about this but it is the easy thing for them to say, no danger to them there.
When you say that's the advice you have received, did they put it to you in writing that Corporate Letting is not exempt from RPZ rules, or did they just suck in their upper lip and say, 'I don't think that would work'.
I would ask what is the legal basis for the advice. Then you will know if it is soundly based or just an excess of caution.
I think you are right. If there is a landlord and a tenant, then the property is subject to the RPZ rules. It doesn't matter whether the tenant is an individual or a company. I know that the multinational won't be the occupant, but the property is leased to them for use by their staff. They are the tenant.Hmmm, just considering your question... I did not request legal advice on the specific question of RPZ rules applying to the type of tenant (U.S. corp in this instance). However, the management (letting) company we have used for 10+ years manage well in excess of 1,000 units on behalf of small landlords such as myself. They are not an auctioneering business, they focus on lettings only. I want to check myself saying this but.... I would expect them to "know" the RPZ rules... but I will put this question to our solicitor and revert next week once he has responded.