Forum Topic

Council proposing licensing for privately rented homes

Expect you have seen the leaflet 'Making Ealing a better place to rent'.  As a responsible landlord I am keen to encourage people to attend the public meetings (23 Feb Ealing Town Hall; 2 March Hanborough primary school, Southall and 10 March Everyone Active Acton all 7.30-9pm).  see www.ealing.gov.uk/prslicensingHere are my thoughts:Ealing Council Private Rented Sector Licencing Consultation11th January 2016 to 3rd April 2016Our response to the Council about the proposed introduction of licenses for the Private Rented Sector(PRS) to all privately rented property in selected Wards; most notably in Acton.As stated in the Councils own document Consultation on licensing the private rented sector in Ealing2016 it states: ‘MOST privately rented flats and houses are in good condition and well managed butsome are not’. To introduce a license in selected parts of the Borough of Ealing is discriminatorypractice which makes ALL landlords pay a large fee regardless of their track record is especiallypunitive on the many good and fair landlords, merely for the ease of the Council in regulating the fewrogue landlords.We would propose a more balanced and fairer system which :1) Operated across the WHOLE Borough2) Allowed good and fair landlords to be recognised through a zero/reduced licence fee3) Allowed a Collective Freeholder of a block of flats (Freehold owned jointly and exclusivelyby ALL flat owners) to apply for a SINGLE block licence (eg through a registeredmanagement company).I urge all responsible Landlords and residential bodies in the following Wards to respond to thisconsultation:Acton CentralEast ActonSouth ActonSally Rivlin

Sally Rivlin ● 3855d14 Comments

There are people living amongst us who haven't a clue which borough they are living in let alone that they might have any responsibilities.  You also can't expect people who only stay somewhere for a short amount of time to provide their own bins.  Gaining planning permission is one thing and providing what has been approved are totally different things unfortunately.  Space inside a flat as well as outside needs to be allocated and retained for safe and hygienic disposal of waste and recycling.  And those are the properties that have permission.

Philippa Bond ● 3844d

Sadly all you have to do is walk down Horn Lane, Churchfield Road or any road where there are lots of rented flats. Those bags you see on the street are full of domestic waste dropped by tenants. Some of us had a meeting with Council officers last week and we have been promised a range of actions. Watch this space. I'm entirely in agreement that most landlords act responsibly but anyone can see there are a few that just collect the rent.

Maire Lowe ● 3846d

Tenants binsMost private tenants pay their own council tax and find out from the council about the local rubbish disposal arrangements and what bins and boxes they need and the collection day, in the same way as any other new resident in the borough.  Of course, any sensible landlord or agent will point their tenants in the right direction, as they would over signing up for gas, electricity and water, but it's the tenant's  home after all, and this is really their responsibility, which the vast majority of tenants are happy to take on and live as decent members of their local community.

Peter Evans ● 3847d

At present landlords have to provide bins and the wording is not specific enough as near me they wouldn't fly around if they were only attached by eye hooks and bungee elastic/chain to the wall - but that is far too complicated for an irresponsible landlord to sort out. The Council may think that by providing wheelies the problem with landlords and flats' waste and recycling will be solved but I very much doubt it.  There will be many more and larger bins taking up more space than necessary and I expect it will cause aggravation and impinge on the car and bicycle space. The flats could share but who is going to broker the deal?  I look forward to being proved wrong but I expect that there will be bins all over the pavement as a result.  It needs more work.

Philippa Bond ● 3849d

I have a 1/3rd share of the freehold where I live with two flats rented out in the same building, by two different landlords. Any regulations or changes i.e. fire escapes etc that the council deems necessary must exclude owners occupiers from any expense.or liability.

Bob Crossley ● 3851d

Brent operate a very similar scheme apparently, a landlord friend of mine living there says it's well run and does a good job.

Gary Sinclair ● 3851d

How can poor, exploitative landlords Be tackled without good, rResponsible ones being unduly punished?Does it need a polluter pays principle and does that ever wholly work?

Sara Nathan ● 3851d

I have rented out a few flats in Acton since 2000. Our tenants tend to stay for very long periods and we have very good relationships with them - some even after they have moved on to larger properties. There are of course poor landlords around - in all areas of the borough and not just Acton. But the vast majority are good. Similarly most tenants are good tenants but occasionally we hear of disaster stories.This appears to be an unfair knee jerk reaction to a limited problem with the costs imposed on law abiding and fair landlords. I also detect possibly some envy underlying some of the comments to this thread - again this is a minority position. The housing issue in London is a crisis and I believe more should be done to provide good quality affordable homes for all so that there is an adequate supply to discourage some landlords from continually raising rents to the absolute maximum.If there is a social issue to be addressed then I agree that appropriate action should be taken - from a social fund.I have little confidence that such a scheme as is being proposed will be any more fair, reasonable or effective than the proliferation of CPZs and the much disliked system of 'traffic' enforcement in minor side roads where hefty fines are imposed for minor indiscretions that actually cause no harm to anyone. Such things are money making initiatives by the council and serve to alienate the council from the very people it is there to serve.

Tony Bailey ● 3852d

We shouldn't be too focused on the £ but on the additional powers the Council will be granted. Self regulation of landlords by landlords clearly doesn't work (remember the Govts attempt at aLandlords Charter?) and this isn't about anti social tenants but anti social landlords who are content to let dangerous and sub standard properties. Allowing things remain as they are is unacceptable so I welcome the Councils efforts. I'd have more time for landlords if they clearly acknowledged that there was a problem and put forward alternative constructive proposals to the Council

Gary Sinclair ● 3853d

The proposal is to have 'special licences' for private landlords in certain wards identified as having more anti-social behaviour.  That suggests that landlords are in some way responsible for the behaviour of their tenants and that charging them £500 will somehow improve things. There are many arguments for licensing all private landlords to make sure they are suitable people, and inspecting all properties to make sure they're of an acceptable standard, but this would require far more staff to monitor than is ever likely to be made available for the task, and this isn't what's being proposed.  What we have here seems to be a way of funding some general anti-asbo strategy rather than genuinely working with landlords to improve the service they provide. Targeting specific wards for an Asbo surcharge will also give all landlords and rental properties in those areas a bad name and could even make the quality of what's provided worse rather than better as they become more difficult to mortgage and insure.  And it certainly won't change the behaviour of rogue landlords, who are most unlikely to sign up for a new licence when they're already quite prepared to flout the many existing laws that apply and which presently go unenforced.   It'll be decent law-abiding landlords who'll end up paying for this scheme, but get little benefit from it.

Peter Evans ● 3853d

There needs to be a lot more discussion and publicity of the law and the problems.  Government wants the Councils to raise the money to deal with these.  Yet it seems it may need Government agencies to deal with what is happening.

Philippa Bond ● 3854d

I want the Council to have these powers and it'll be up to us to hold them to account. I'm glad they recognise there is a problem and they'll need the additional resources to fund the enforcement teams.

Gary Sinclair ● 3854d

Simply a money making red tape system.  This is never enforced properly.  I have had countless issues with rental properties next to me, they fall under the COMPULSORY scheme and Ealing Council does nothing to impose penalties, just collects payments for the license and never even does an inspection, not even to check if basic items have been complied with.  What's the point of this version? And why are properties rented by families excluded? Sometimes they are the worst ones, not to mention this means there are less available properties for professional sharers who in my opinion make great neighbours.For those FOR the change, you will never see the benefits! Look at those areas that are already subject to licensing and tell me if you see the benefits!!

James Feth ● 3854d

Sorry but I fully support the Councils approach and the fees are not that unreasonable.  Just look at the horror of the exploitative rogue landlords on here and the sheer misery they have caused. I'm sorry they pull good landlords down with them  but I cannot feel any real sympathy with landlords good or bad given how much rental income they get. A small payment for a better regulated local private rented sector market is a small price to pay.

Gary Sinclair ● 3854d

Hi Sally,I am definitely going to attend the meeting in Acton on 10th March.  I feel very strongly about this as I am a very responsible and law abiding landlady, who does not subject tenants to squalor.  I treat my tenants the way that I would like to be treated and, therefore, feel this proposed 'licence fee' very unfair.  Or, is it just another way to fleece us out of even more money?

Danielle Fox ● 3855d