Industry News


Warning more funding needed to enforce no-fault evictions ban


C


ouncils in England have warned they will need more staff and funding to effectively enforce the ban on no-fault evictions in the


private rented sector. Te Renters (Reform) Bill which is going through


Parliament will ban landlords from evicting tenants without justification, with councils given responsibility for enforcement of the new rules. While the Local Government Association has


welcomed the changes it has said councils will struggle to police them properly even though the Government has said it will fully fund any additional costs for councils. Councils will be able to keep any revenue from


civil penalties imposed on rogue landlords, with the money ring-fenced for further enforcement activity but there are concerns that serious costs can be racked up before court action is begun especially as council officers try to resolve cases without going to court. Most councils say they do not currently have


the staffing resources to proactively find landlords who are breaching rules and they rely on tenants to report concerns. Te new law will only allow landlords to evict


tenants in certain circumstances, including when they wish to sell the property or when they or a close family member want to move in. If they do so, they will not be allowed to re-let their property for three months. Breaching the new rules carries a fine of up to £30,000.


Most councils say they do not currently have the staffing resources to proactively find landlords who are breaching rules and they rely on tenants to report concerns


In addition the bill introduces a new database,


which landlords will be legally required to sign up to. Te database should make it easier for


councils to enforce the legislation by saving time and allowing them to identify who was letting out properties and flag any breaches. Darren Rodwell, the LGA’s housing spokesman,


said “every council I’m aware of” has a shortage of environmental health officers and tenancy relations officers, who investigate potential offences related to private rented housing. “New regulation is important, and we welcome


it, but we need to make sure we have the right financial package to be able to enforce and deliver it,” he added. Te Chartered Institute of Environmental


Health, which represents the sector, also said more funding was needed to ensure the new legislation was effective. Henry Dawson, a member of the organisation’s


housing advisory panel, said there was a “desperate shortage” of environmental health officers and tenancy relations officers. “At the moment it’s very much about firefighting


in major cases. If we’re about to bring in a whole raſt of new responsibilities for local authorities, we need to bring in more staffing to support that and also a sustainable model for funding of new staff.” A Department for Housing, Levelling Up and


Communities spokesman said: “We will continue to support councils financially so they have the right resources to put tenants first, that includes fully funding any additional costs that may fall on councils as a result of our proposed reforms.”


Ombudsman orders council to pay £5,500 after 120 repairs raised over four years


Te Ombudsman has made a finding of severe maladministration against Milton Keynes Council aſter its inappropriate complaint handling led to a disabled resident and her son living with multiple repairs issues outstanding for years. For its failures the landlord was ordered to pay £5,500 in compensation. Te complaint relates to various repairs jobs that


were not completed, with repairs logs showing at least 120 jobs raised for the one household alone over four years. But it was the complaint handling where the


Ombudsman found severe maladministration, with a host of issues hampering the resolution of the repairs issues. Firstly, the landlord failed to raise the resident’s


formal complaint when it came in, with a councillor’s attempts to chase a formal response also unsuccessful. Tere were also then delays to both the stage one


and two responses, despite the Ombudsman getting involved. When it did respond, the landlord failed to provide a thorough investigation of its repairs handling and address the outstanding issues raised by the resident. On top of this, it failed to recognise the amount


of time and the number of appointments it took to resolve some of the issues. Linking to this, the landlord did not express any empathy towards the resident or recognise the impact on her child given their vulnerabilities. Tis was inappropriate, caused additional


frustration and may have contributed to the resident’s accusation that she was being discriminated by the landlord based on her disability. On top of the compensation, the Ombudsman


16 | HMMAugust/September 2023 | www.housingmmonline.co.uk


ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident, carry out repairs and a damp and mould inspection and subsequent works arising from that report. Richard Blakeway, housing ombudsman,


said: “A mother and her son, who both have disabilities, were not treated with the respect they deserved. Understandably, the family felt discriminated against because of the landlord’s poor communication, compounded by repeated failings on repairs. “Te landlord failed to respond within the


timescales of the Complaint Handling Code and its policies, did not address the key failings within the case and continues to show few signs of learning from these errors.” “While we oſten see landlords without repairs


logs, this case shows the importance of not only recording data but using it as intelligence to ask questions about where services may be going wrong.” Te Ombudsman also found maladministration


in how the council handled repairs at the property and its record keeping for not keeping adequate repairs records or obtain any records from its contractors.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52