Lead Member:Councillor Alex Hollingsworth, Board Member for Planning and Regulatory Services.

The Head of Planning, Sustainable Development and Regulatory Services has submitted a report which sets out the preferred option for changing the regulation of the private rented sector in Oxford.

Recommendation: That the City Executive Board resolves to:

1.         Approve the option of establishing and pursuing a 5 year proactive inspection programme of unlicensed privately rented properties.

2.         Approve the use of all the funds generated from Civil Penalties issued under the Housing and Planning Act 2016 for the purposes of enforcement in the private rented sector.

3.         Approve the Civil Penalty Protocol and delegate authority to the Head of Service for Planning, Sustainable Development and Regulatory Services to review and update the protocol in consultation with the Head of Law and Governance and the Executive Director.

The Head of Planning, Sustainable Development and Regulatory Services submitted a report which set out the preferred option for changing the regulation of the private rented sector in Oxford.

Councillor Alex Hollingsworth, Board Member for Planning and Regulatory Services introduced the report and noted his appreciation of the Scrutiny Committee’s prior consideration of it.

The scope of the scheme was constrained to some extent by central government requirements but the recommendations would, nonetheless, represent an next important step in improving conditions in the private rented sector.

The overall objective of the scheme was to ensure that people living in the private rented sector can do so in a safe and healthy environment. The scheme was not intended to raise money (via civil penalties) or to penalise landlords for their own sakes. The money raised, would, however, be put to good use by meeting the costs of the scheme and creating a ring fenced account to fund further enforcement activity.

The City Executive Board resolved to:

1.         Approve the option of establishing and pursuing a 5 year proactive inspection programme of unlicensed privately rented properties.

2.         Approve the use of all the funds generated from Civil Penalties issued under the Housing and Planning Act 2016 for the purposes of enforcement in the private rented sector.

3.         Approve the Civil Penalty Protocol and delegate authority to the Head of Service for Planning, Sustainable Development and Regulatory Services to review and update the protocol in consultation with the Head of Law and Governance and the Executive Director.

The Board Member for Planning and Regulatory Services and the Environmental Health Service Manager introduced their report.  They said that the intention was to improve standards in the non-HMO private rented sector.  The proposal was to do so by using new powers to issue civil penalties to rogue landlords who failed to comply with an Improvement Notice.  The penalties would be retained by the Council and used to fund two fixed term officer posts.  Most landlords operating in the city were good and had nothing to fear from this approach, which was considered to be fair and effective.  A selective licensing scheme had been considered but rejected on the basis that to be acceptable to government, a scheme would have only covered part of the city, and not necessarily those areas where enforcement actions were concentrated.  This would have created unfairness and flaws in the system.

A representative of Oxford Community Forum addressed the Panel.  He said that his organisation has opposed the introduction of selective licensing for HMOs and questioned why the Council was intent on intervening in the private rented sector, rather than the social or universities sectors.  He said that landlords were not aware of what the Council was doing and would feel insecure about the implications of further interventions.  He questioned what safeguards would be in place to govern the use of these new powers.

The Environmental Health Service Manager explained the background to HMO licensing and provided assurance that landlords would have opportunities to comply before being served with a penalty.

In discussion and in response to questions the Panel noted that:

·         The approach was not expected to impact rent levels;

·         Tenants were protected from retaliatory evictions;

·         Officers would use a range of data sources, intelligence and experience to identify the properties most likely to be in disrepair;

·         Once an offense had been identified, three senior officers and a lawyer needed to be satisfied at various stages before an intention to issue a civil notice was given to the landlord.

·         The appeals process had not been tested and income would need to be carefully monitored;

·         The Council would be the first in the country to take this approach although others were considering doing so;

·         The names of landlords issued with a civil notice would not be made public, although they would be placed on a government database.

·         For very serious offenses landlords may face banning orders, although that power had not been used yet.

·         The Council would be targeting poor housing rather than specific geographies.

The Panel agreed to request an annual report in order to monitor spend and numbers of inspections and enforcement actions taken.