Issue - meetings

Cabinet previously requested that evidence be gathered to ascertain whether the legislative conditions for introducing additional licensing of houses in multiple occupation could be met, and if so, undertake a 10-week public consultation exercise.  This report informs Cabinet of the results of these activities and seeks a decision on whether to designate part of Bath as an area subject to additional licensing for specified types of HMOs.

Martin Thomas in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 9 and on the Council’s website] said that the consultation on the proposals had failed to demonstrate that the council had considered other approaches, for example the use of its extensive existing powers to tackle problems.  He felt that so far as housing standards were concerned, there was no case for introducing additional licensing.

Rob Crawford (Chair, National Landlords Association Wessex Branch) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 10 and on the Council’s website] said that the council was in danger of being in breach of the Housing Act 2004 because it had not satisfied the criteria laid out in the Act.  He felt that the published evidence documents showed a bias.  The papers did not demonstrate that a significant proportion of HMOs were being managed ineffectively.  He regretted that if the Council pressed on with the measures, it would be subject to legal remedy.

Jacqui Darbyshire (National Landlords Association) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 11 and on the Council’s website] said she believed that the proposals would make the situation worse.  The loss of the existing voluntary, city-wide accreditation scheme will have a detrimental effect.  She also cited the experience of Thanet District Council, where the license scheme had cost more than £500K.

Gavin Dick (National Landlords Association) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 22 and on the Council’s website] gave a number of reasons why the proposals would not tackle the problem.  He called for the Council to use its existing powers to resolve the problems of bad landlords and tenants.

Rosemary Simcox in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 12 and on the Council’s website] said that as a landlord she had found good will on all sides to maintain safety and high standards.  She felt that the proposals would alienate all landlords.  She appealed to Cabinet to encourage the existing successful Accreditation scheme.

Alexander von Tutschek in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 13 and on the Council’s website] said that landlords had a vested interest in working with the community and with the Council.  He suggested some ways in which landlords could be encouraged to make sure that tenants left houses and gardens tidy at the end of their leases.  He felt that these co-operative approaches would be more effective than the proposals now before Cabinet.

Councillor Will Sandry in an ad hoc statement reminded the Cabinet that the local community must be considered.  He had seen the conditions in which some rogue landlords allowed students to live.  The Accreditation scheme was voluntary so the bad landlords had ignored it.  He believed that the proposals were the right approach and would improve standards for all.

The Chair observed that Appendix  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22