Sutton Council has gone against its own officers’ advice and rejected plans to convert a family home on a narrow residential street into an HMO, following a “huge” wave of objections from neighbours who warned it would cause “a lot of headaches”.
Councillors dismissed the controversial application last week, saying the decision sets a vital precedent to protect the borough’s remaining family homes. The proposal would have turned 15 Surrey Grove, Carshalton, from a three-bedroom family house into a four-room HMO for elderly residents, adding two ground-floor bedrooms, both en-suite, to the existing layout.
It would have replaced one of the borough’s few remaining family homes on a street largely occupied by families and older residents, close to the busy St Helier Hospital.
Planning officers had recommended approval after a pre-application consultation with the property owner, Mohammed Khan, arguing the HMO would not worsen parking or safety because a three-bedroom family home could generate similar car ownership and activity. They noted the street was outside a controlled parking zone, which “suggests there is no high parking demand”, and highlighted that the Highways Team had raised no objection.
Councillors, however, disagreed strongly. Lib Dem Councillor Patrick Ogbonna, whose The Wrythe ward includes Surrey Grove, stated bluntly: “I have been there, I know the road. There is nowhere to park on that road.”
Residents who attended the meeting in force on December 3 echoed this concern. Speaking on their behalf, Mr Chaloner said: “Multiple occupancy would increase parking pressures. We find it extremely surprising the council’s Highways Team make no objection and actually stated the proposed development would not result in an adverse impact on the state of operation on the public highway or public car parking.”
He also questioned why officers had not taken issue with parking when a formal consultation on a controlled parking zone had taken place, which could see yellow line restrictions introduced if approved.
Mr Chaloner said “no one is in support” of the HMO, warning that Surrey Grove’s family character and proximity to six schools made it wholly unsuitable. Residents also argued that adding an extra bedroom would shrink the existing rooms, with one commenting: “It will be like living in a prison cell, I think.”
Conservative Councillor Tony Shields also questioned the logic of the revised layout, saying the rooms “appear to be cramped in their form”, with “no closet space” and no proper shared living area. He joked: “If these residents own more than one pair of socks each we are in for storage problems.”
Critics also highlighted potential antisocial behaviour, citing previous issues at a nearby unlicensed HMO, which included noise and late-night activity. “The occupants were coming and going at all hours with mopeds and congregating in the front garden causing anxiety and distress to neighbours,” said Mr Chaloner, adding: “We do not wish this to happen again.”
Applicant Mr Khan, who runs similar HMOs in London and Surrey, dismissed these concerns, explaining he only intended to house elderly residents who would receive a daily check-in and had never received complaints at his other properties, which he manages for his father.
Despite reassurances that the HMO would not disturb the street, he admitted: “If I knew it was going to be so painful I wouldn’t have gone for it.”
He added he needed to see the project through but conceded: “Nothing I say is going to put any minds at ease,” while insisting the HMO would not add stress to neighbours, though he acknowledged he “wasn’t expecting 50 objections”.
Beyond parking and amenity concerns, councillors argued the borough would lose another valuable three-bedroom home. “We are going to lose another family home, which could accommodate a family of eight,” said Councillor Trish Fivey.
Sutton currently has around 900 HMOs, compared with 811 in inner London’s Royal Borough of Greenwich as of July. The increase has prompted the council to introduce an Article 4 Direction, which removes permitted development rights for converting family homes into smaller HMOs and requires full planning permission.
Independent Councillor Tim Foster told the committee that approving the Surrey Grove application would go “completely against the foundations” of the policy, which states developments should “not impact negatively on existing communities and amenities”.
He added: “You have 50-plus objectors, 44 of them come from Surrey Grove itself.”
Cllr Foster warned that approving the scheme would contradict council rules, despite pre-application advice given to Mr Khan, which officers say is standard practice. Councillors ultimately rejected the officer recommendation, ruling the proposal would harm neighbourhood amenity through noise and disturbance, increase pressure on parking, and represent an “inappropriate location for an HMO” that would result in “an unacceptable loss of a single family dwelling”.
Councillor Shields said a firm refusal would protect the street long-term, stating: “If we refuse this comprehensively it wards off the next application and the next one after that because we set a precedent.”
Surrey Grove residents have reacted with relief to the council’s decision. After the meeting, resident spokesperson Lee Durham told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “We believe that the location of the proposed HMO is completely unsuitable. It is such a shame that developers are buying small family homes and turning them into HMOs for large profits at the cost of the community.
“HMOs definitely have their place, but this location is totally unsuitable and is purely based on financial gain of the developer. This is why we are relieved that the council had good judgement at the meeting with refusing this application.”
