The point is that all councils, one way or another, must be able to evidence their private rented sector (PRS) housing enforcement activity. This is even more so the case now, following the recent letter sent by Michael Gove MP to all council leaders and chief executives in England demanding details of their housing enforcement activity relating to damp and mould issues in both the social and private rented sector.

There’s just one problem though, with regard to housing standards enforcement beyond, currently, damp and mould. As the National Audit Office (NAO) made clear in its December 2021 report (at section 3.6, page 32) Regulation of Private Renting - “There is no requirement for local authorities to record their regulatory activity in relation to the private rented sector, or to report such information to the Department [DLUHC]. Data are not collected, for example, on the number of complaints, the number of [property] inspections, or the number of staff that carry out tenancy relations duties to tackle harassment and illegal eviction”.

The NAO went on to say that what data was collected was “of limited use” and that “Without a more complete picture of how local authorities are using the tools available to them, the Department [DLUHC] cannot meaningfully analyse which ones are effective at improving compliance [with housing standards], and in what circumstances”.

The proposal in the Rental Reform white paper for the creation of a national landlord register for the PRS will go some way as far as data collection goes but there are concerns that, without more, this won’t solve issues relating to compliance with housing standards or enforcement of those standards. The existing rogue landlord database provides evidence of enforcement but so far, the impact of that database is, at a national level, negligible. Unless that is, you’re a resident of Camden, the council that has, enthusiastically, entered the highest number of landlords on the database to date.

Currently, the best way a local authority can evidence its PRS compliance and enforcement activity is via a selective licensing scheme. Although some such schemes are borough wide - thus requiring prior approval by the Secretary of State at DLUHC - most cover discrete ward areas within a council’s boundaries that comply with any one of 6 indicators ranging from poor housing standards to levels of ASB, crime and deprivation. Thus, there are set parameters, existing prior to a scheme being designated, improvements in which the “outcomes” success of the scheme can be judged, via periodic review as the licensing scheme progresses through its 5 year term.

At the Home Safe Scheme for example, our experience working as the selective licensing Delivery Partner for Great Yarmouth Council has meant that the council has been able to focus its existing compliance and enforcement resource activity efficiently. This has resulted in getting licences processed and issued within time, 3 rounds of inspections of all accessible properties carried out (adjusted due to the Covid pandemic) and an evidence base of compliance and non compliance by landlords which has allowed the council to successfully target civil penalties and prosecutions where and when needed.

This experience shows why calls by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) for the proposed national landlord register to be used to support councils in using selective licensing as an effective tool to improve both housing standards and standards of management in the PRS should be heeded. The point of councils being able to evidence their housing standards activity, however that ends up being done, isn’t just about efficiency. It’s also about accountability - to tenants, to landlords and to Communities. Councils can’t just tell, they have to show as well.

Looking for up to the minute updates on all selective licensing and PRS news? Follows us on Facebook Twitter LinkedIn