The Changing Face of HMOs in Portsmouth: Council Data Reveals Sharp Decline

Portsmouth City Council's long-standing estimate of 6,000 Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) in the city has been turned on its head by the council's own licensing records. Latest figures show less than half the 4,309 HMOs recorded five years ago and far fewer than the oft-quoted figure of 6,000. Personally, I had 4 small student HMOs in the south of the city 3 years ago, now I have none. I am not alone, every landlord I meet tells a similar tale – yet until today, this anecdotal evidence was completely at odds with the rhetoric of councillors, coverage in the press and figures from the council. What has happened, why and what does it say about supply, demand and the future shape of shared housing in Portsmouth?

PCC's own data shows: Since 2018, the net number of large HMOs has increased by about 80 (from ~1200) that is an average of just +1% per year. At the same time, more than 10 times that number of small HMOs have been taken out of HMO use.

This has implications – all flexibility to support the student market has been removed from the south of the city which will seriously impact the University and the councils own policies and regulations are causing the PO2 area particularly to feel as though it is being cluster bombed with large HMOs occupied by dubious tenants.

Halving of Small HMOs in the South

Portsmouth's Article 4 Direction, introduced to cap HMO density at 10% in any location, coupled with the introduction of Additional Licensing for small HMOs has accelerated closures and consolidations among smaller properties. Once dominated by three- and four-bed student lets, the city's southern wards have seen some of the steepest drops:

• Guildford Road (PO1): 26 down to 11 HMOs
• Clive Road (PO1): 23 down to 7 HMOs
• Bath Road (PO4): 44 down to 23 HMOs
• Waterloo Street (PO5): 9 down to 6 HMOs (5 now as one of those was mine!)

These figures paint a clear picture: landlords of smaller shared homes are either exiting the HMO market as I did or enlarging properties, which moves them from 'small HMO/Additional Licensing/C4' status to 'larger HMO/Mandatory Licensing/Sui Generis'.

Growth of Larger HMOs in the North

In stark contrast, the north of the city is witnessing a surge in larger conversions and new applications:

• Chichester Road (PO2): jumped from 11 to 23 HMOs, most now seven-bed homes or larger

The data also shows a migration of larger HMOs away from PO1/PO4/PO5. The increase of large HMOs in PO2 exceeds the net increase of large HMOs across the city. Since 2022, the number of large HMOs in PO2 has almost doubled from 116 to 218. That is not at all representative of what is happening across the city but does explain why ward councillors in this area are so enraged by each new HMO application. 

Data, Licensing Trends, Room Counts & Rents

 The current HMO database has 3,318 entries:

• 201 properties hold mixed C3/C4 planning consent but remain unlicensed, so one assumes currently in family use (i.e. not HMOs)
• 860 units sit within purpose-built private student halls, so yes an HMO for licensing purposes but not in the sense that everyone gets upset about
• 149 buildings fall under Section 257 (pre-1991 conversions) and are typically self-contained flats and not HMOs
• Only ~2,100 exist as conventional shared houses or sui generis HMOs—down 52% since the 'Housing Needs Assessment' last documented numbers in 2018.

Despite the overall drop, mandatory licensing for larger HMOs (five or more occupants) has risen modestly by around 80 such properties, or +1% per year. Additional licensing (three- and four-person HMOs) remains lower than expected. Breaking it down:

• Mandatory licences: 1,281 homes (plus 282 flats in halls)
• Additional licences: 827 homes (plus 578 flats in halls)

Including student flats, the database lists approximately 15,300 rooms, equating to one in six Portsmouth households living in HMOs. The 2021 census recorded 31,000 single-person households—suggesting about half of those reside in shared or student-style accommodation.

In terms of rooms, 5 times more HMOs rooms have been lost than gained; PDPLA's estimate is a loss of two to three thousand rooms for low income single people and we have previously documented the impact on rents – a typical HMO rent 3 years ago in a small Southsea HMO was £400-450 whereas now the median rent is more than double that as investors recoup the outlay of converting large family houses in the north of the city into 7-9 bed HMOs with en suite facilities and space and amenities in line with Portsmouth's (excessive compared to other LA's) standards.

Data Accuracy and Anomalies

 The updated database is more precise than its predecessor but still shows glitches:

• Some properties are missing; others appear twice
• One Nightingale Road property has two entries for Flat 3 despite a single licence
• Occasional address mismatches hint at data-entry errors
• 
  

These inconsistencies highlight the need for ongoing audit and clean-up to ensure all HMOs are properly counted and managed. It is inaccuracy, poorly conducted surveys and bad analysis which has fuelled much of the misunderstanding about HMOs – it really is time PCC got its act together in this area.

What This Means for Portsmouth's Housing Landscape

The sharp decline in smaller HMOs contrasted with the cluster bombing of large HMOs raining onto PO2 raises important questions:

• If the only option for the University is PBSA (student halls), how do they house any sudden growth / how will the halls survive if we have a couple of years with fewer students? And what does this mean for the city as a whole?
• How will fewer student-style homes affect the wider rental market?
• Are the higher HMO rents pushing through into other sectors and also being reflected in increased house prices? (We have evidence that this is the case, but that is a topic for another day)
• Given that current policies have drastically reduced the number of 'cheap' rooms available as confirmed by the rapid increase in emergency housing needs, is the councils policy of housing these people with 'social' providers in large HMOs going to provide impetus for yet more large HMOs and even higher rents, creating even greater needs for emergency housing?

For landlords, the choice seems simple – get out or invest, refurbish, enlarge and go up market (rent-wise anyway). For councillors the choices are much harder – are they killing the university 'golden goose' while creating a housing problem that can only get worse or do all these rules and behaviours have any hope of achieving what they set out to do.

Obviously all of our analysis will be disregarded as we are assumed to be lobbying for our own good – but if I were a councillor I would be commissioning an independent audit of licensing data and consulting community groups on the real-world impacts of density restrictions, before this crisis becomes a disaster.