Agenda item

Members heard from the Housing and Enforcement Manager who presented a report regarding the proposed options and approaches for future work within the Private Rented Sector. The Committee was reminded that in July 2022 they had made a number of recommendations to enable the Council to review its approach to improving the Private Rented Sector (PRS). As a result, a small working group of Councillors was set up to consider this subject and oversee the delivery of workshops to Councillors, aimed at identifying the priorities for the PRS and the approaches that would be preferred to address these. The working group was made up of five Councillors and the commitment and contribution of the working group was noted as key to ensuring that this piece of work developed and evolved over the period of time since July 2022. They also played a key role in reviewing and amending the format of the Councillor workshops which were held in December.

The Housing and Enforcement Manager summarised the options that had been considered, and the rationale for the working group recommending option D, that being, to choose to revisit Selective Licensing at a future date with new data and new proposals. It was recognised that a combination of approaches might be needed in order to deal with the scale of the challenge faced by the Council and Members were asked to focus on their decision in relation to Selective Licensing and from this, consider the approach that they might wish to take for any other activities. It was highlighted that the pros and cons of the various approaches could be seen within the workshop slides that had been distributed to all Councillors, and could also be found at appendix 2 of the report.

The Chairman thanked the Officer and also the Members of the working group. He recognised the importance of PRS throughout the district and highlighted the value of the focus of work on this area.

Vice Chairman Councillor T. Coulson, as Chairman of the Working Group, reiterated thanks and also informed Members that the email referenced earlier in the meeting during Declarations of Interest had been responded to. She highlighted that the working group had spent considerable time discussing the situation and processes, with the focus now to agree a way forward. She recognised that proactive engagement with landlords would be key, and, in voicing her support for the recommendations as printed in the report, moved the paper.

A Member of the Committee voiced his concerns regarding the money that had been spent on the previous consultation for Selective Licensing and questioned the sense behind repeating that process, stating his belief that the scheme had not previously worked to address wider issues such as poor quality housing, energy inefficiency and levels of anti-social behaviour (ASB). He highlighted the need to address those areas of concern, which he did not feel would be achieved through Selective Licensing. He commented that, whilst ASB should be a problem for the Police to address, there did not seem to have been any improvements despite multiple reports of such. The Member also queried whether Councillors could be provided with a flow chart of sorts, in order to assist with resident enquiries about ASB, and further questioned why there was a proposed six-month timescale for any future report.

In response, the Chairman commented that he felt it was necessary to disaggregate ASB and housing conditions in the Private Rented Sector, as there would be houses in the PRS where ASB was not an issue, equally there would be troubles with ASB related to homes that were privately owned or rented through housing associations. He stated the Council’s duty to look after residents in PRS housing, stating a well-publicised case of avoidable death that had occurred nationally. He then requested the Housing and Enforcement Manager to provide further clarity on the points raised.

Members heard that the intention of revisiting the matter with a future report to the Committee within the six-month timescale, was to subsequently set out a policy relating to Selective Licensing, whether that be to re-implement, or not, or another option. It was highlighted that there was no commitment being sought at this stage, however the working group had emphasised the need to have some time for Officers to undertake some focussed proactive work and see what the situation was following that. It had been clear within the working group meetings that the scale of problems to be addressed could not all be dealt with using Selective Licensing and there was no one simple solution. Whatever the future approach may be, there did need to be a Council policy agreed alongside relevant costings.

In reference to concerns regarding ASB, it was highlighted that Selective Licensing had been the only ‘housing based’ tool to address instances of ASB, and that in the absence of Selective Licensing, Officers had to rely on other avenues of enforcement. However, the team were working to ‘scale up’ the statutory work, collecting data such as energy efficiency, in order to understand the scale of the issue.

Members were also informed that any subsequent report would be brought before the Committee within six months, meaning it could be brought sooner if Committee so wished, but no later than the six-month mark.

The Member of the Committee who had voiced those concerns answered by the Officer expressed his assent that his questions had been addressed, and the Chairman sought further comments from Members.

The suggestion of a flow chart for Members to have as a quick reference guide was supported and it was hoped this could be included in the Member Welcome Pack for all Councillors after the elections in May 2023. It was also requested that any future iteration of the Committee be provided with full background information to this matter, in order to fully understand the history and breadth of consideration required. It was confirmed that any future Committee Members would be fully briefed.

During the course of further discussions, Members highlighted the need to work with other agencies to address some of the issues raised, such as the Police, Parish Councils, as well as increasing accessibility and ease of use of any such information on the Council website, in order that residents and communities knew who and where to approach with their concerns. There were further comments regarding the impact of ASB on individuals and communities, with circumstances such as a lack of facilities for young people, being cited as a possible cause. The suggestion for multi-agency working, for example with the education sector, was recognised as a positive holistic approach.

In response to concerns raised that there was no immediate solution to either ASB or the PRS, the Housing and Enforcement Manager clarified that it had not been the remit of the working group to solve ASB in the district. The matter in hand was management of the PRS and its condition. If there needed to be a broader piece of work regarding ASB, it could be looked at separately.

With no further comments from Members of the Committee, and having extended his thanks again to all involved, the Chairman read aloud the recommendations contained within the report and, having been moved and seconded, he took the vote. It was

RESOLVED that:

a)    the policy position in regards to selective licensing be agreed as “Option D”, as set out in the options table on page 8 of the report, and that the timeframe for revisiting selective licensing be scheduled to be between 12 and 24 months; and

b)    a further report be brought back to the Prosperous Communities Committee within 6 months to outline the proposed future approach for delivery.