The housing market has gone through phenomenal changes since the millennium. In that time private rented sector households have doubled to 4.4 million, there are now an estimated 1.5 million private landlords, the social housing sector has withered on the vine (with a consequent migration of renters into the private rented sector) and – the 2004 Housing Act came into force putting in place a licensing system that Local Authorities could use as part of their private rented housing regulatory toolkit. This private sector licensing system is arguably seen by many landlords as, in and of itself, enforcement rather than a process which can, but doesn’t have to, result in “Enforcement” by way of fines or prosecutions.

In its December 2021 report, Regulation of Private Renting, the NAO (National Audit Office) points out that private landlords are subject currently to 36 different pieces of legislation when renting out a property. Factor in swingeing cuts to Local Authority staffing and financial resources and it shouldn’t be surprising that Local Authorities might reach for licensing schemes as a regulatory option for the sector in their area with the view that landlords need to be proactive rather than a Local Authority being reactive. But (and accepting that there will always be a percentage of rogue elements in the sector, as in any industry sector), “Enforcement”, whether viewed as having to apply for a licence to operate in the first place or as an end point of being served with a civil penalty or prosecuted, can’t be the whole story if licensing schemes are to be seen as successful by all stakeholders including landlords.

Recent research carried out by Opinium for Direct Line business insurance in February 2022 suggests that up to a quarter of private sector landlords “don’t feel on top of” the changing regulatory environment they operate in. This backs up the NAO report’s finding (citing a Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities 2018 survey of over 7,000 private landlords) that around 46% of landlords have a mixed or low level of compliance and awareness of regulations and legal obligations. Note the distinction between “compliance” and “awareness” – if Local Authorities can work to tackle the awareness problem then might there not be less of an issue with having to enforce compliance? The Government’s own 2019 review of Selective Licensing points out that the most effective licensing schemes were those where there was “Effective engagement with both landlords and tenants, but especially raising, through dialogue and training, landlord awareness of their responsibilities”.

Given the amount of applicable legislation referred to earlier it’s not surprising that a non-professional (but not “rogue”) landlord might struggle, especially where they are required to deal with social issues like anti-social behaviour or tenant vulnerability rather than functional issues like disrepair. These landlords don’t need degree level knowledge but could certainly do with more than just a downloadable PDF copy of a set of licence conditions. It would go some way with a lot of landlords and wouldn’t be difficult for a Local Authority if a basic introduction to licensing could be provided when a scheme is designated. Backed up with regular communications with licensed landlords about how a scheme is progressing and updates on successful actions taken against actual rogue landlords both landlords and their tenants would have a clearer perspective of the scheme, feel that there is added value to licensing and thus be more likely to engage.