Local authorities are about to get extensive new powers over the private rented sector but are they equipped to use them?
Housing minister John Healey confirmed yesterday that new houses in multiple occupation (HMO) will need planning permission and that councils will be able to introduce new selective licensing schemes in areas with substantial numbers of substandard properties without permission from central government. Meanwhile a new national register of landlords will be part of a package of new reforms due shortly in the government’s response to the Rugg review.
The proposed new use class for HMOs - defined as properties shared by three or more people who are not part of the same household - has already drawn protests from landlords and cheers from local campaign groups.
The National Landlords Association (NLA) accused Healey of ‘taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut’ and warned that it would reduce the supply of shared homes (20% of the private rented sector and rising) and create no-go areas for students and migrant workers.
But they will be popular with resident groups and could be a big vote winner in towns and cities with large numbers of students. Communities secretary John Denham tells his local paper in Southampton today: ‘I’ve campaigned for these changes, alongside local residents, for years so am delighted they will now be made.’
The big question though is whether local authorities will be able to cope with the new system. The report on mandatory licensing of HMOs published yesterday confirms that that only 16,000 out of an estimated 56,000 licensable properties were licensed in the first two years of the schemes. By March 2009, 35,000 were still unlicensed.
Add possible new selective licensing schemes, planning permission for new HMOs and dealing with the landlord register and that’s quite a workload for town halls. The Rugg review described the planning permission idea as ‘an extreme response given the limited nature of the problem. Change to the use classes order introduces the need for additional activity that local authorities are ill-equipped to handle’.
John Healey acknowledged the problem in his statement. ‘I am therefore reviewing the support available to local authorities in relation to regulation of the private rented sector,’ he said, ‘including publishing draft guidance on licensing provisions, and will put in place any changes before the commencement of the new powers I am announcing today.’
However, with public spending cuts imminent, it’s a problem that won’t go away
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (4)
Bannside | 28/01/2010 2:08 pm
There already are powers to deal with unlicensed HMOs - Interim and Final Management Orders. introduced in the Housing Act 2004.They are rarely used.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
sharon | 29/01/2010 11:19 am
Interesting comment and it does raise more questions such as why, if these powers are there, are they not widely used? Or is it more convenient not to use them so that those that resist even the most basic form of licencing can cite the current number of unlicenced HMO's as a reason for not intruducing the scheme?
Private landlord associations work very closely with local authorities and whilst in principle have agreed with the Rugg Review proposal of a basic licencing scheme, they have been particularly resistant to the government's own licencing proposals, which went considerably further.
There may well be no connection but I sometimes wonder!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ken | 01/02/2010 3:19 pm
There are many houses temporarilly in the private rented sector because the owners feel this is a bad time to sell. If, when renting them out for a few months, they have to get planning permission for them as HMOs, then presumably they would then need to get planning permission again to change use back to being a family home. This is a double workload for planning departments that they could not possibly cope with. The net result would surely be still fewer homes available as houses sit empty, victims of a planning logjam. Am I right on this point?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jules Birch | 04/02/2010 12:21 pm
Thanks for the comments. The difference between having the powers and being able to use and enforce them is exactly what I was trying to get at. Ken - as I read it the consultation paper was saying that one option would be that you would not have to get planning permission for change of use back from an HMO to an ordinary home but would to convert to an HMO.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment