12
Resolved
That Cabinet:
i) notes the progress made with improving the private rented sector (PRS) since January 2017 following the introduction of additional House in Multiple Occupancy (HMO) licensing boroughwide and selective licensing of all other PRS properties in the wards of Acton Central, East Acton, South Acton, Southall Broadway and Southall Green.
ii) notes the evidence report highlighting the scale of poor housing conditions, deprivation, crime, anti-social behaviour (ASB) and environmental nuisance linked to the private rented sector in Ealing.
iii) authorises the Director of Place Delivery to commence a statutory consultation exercise with residents, private landlords, businesses and other key stakeholders on proposals for additional and selective licensing schemes for five years from 2022.
iv) notes a further report with the outcome of the consultation would be brought to November 2021 Cabinet with recommendations as to whether or not to renew the additional and selective licensing schemes.
Reason for Decision and Options Considered
Ealing was among the largest Boroughs in London with a population estimated at 346,908 in 2018. Population projections by the GLA anticipated that this would increase to 398,309 by 2031. Currently there were over 143,863 residential properties in the borough and 54,776 were estimated to be in the private rented sector. Based on tenure modelling undertaken in January 2021, Ealing's PRS was now calculated to be 38.1% of housing stock. This compared to 23% of households in 2011 (ONS) and represented a 65.7% increase over the last 10 years. By comparison owner occupation had shrunk from 55% in 2011 to an estimate of 42% in 2021, whilst social renting had been virtually static at 20%
Ealing was consistent with London in that it had a shortage of affordable housing and a shrinking prevalence of owner-occupation. These facts together with the projected increase in population indicated that the size and importance of the PRS would continue to grow and be the only type of accommodation available to many Ealing residents including persons who were on low incomes and were vulnerable. The PRS was also becoming the only sector available to older persons, including those of retirement age, who had not been able to buy their own home. Housing conditions in the PRS were, on average, often in worse condition than in other tenures. The coronavirus pandemic had highlighted that housing and health inequalities were a factor in exacerbating the spread of covid-19, as well as other illnesses such as cancer, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.
Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups were disproportionately likely to suffer from poor housing, which would not only have an impact on their health but could also have a detrimental impact on safety, education and life chances.
HMOs remained an important and integral part of the housing supply and met the demands of a whole range of residents. The term HMO applied to a wide range of forms of housing normally in the private rented sector, for example, hostels, 'bed and breakfast' accommodation, halls of residence and supported housing regimes. HMOs were the cheapest form of private rented accommodation and often housed people who were vulnerable, disabled and or were living on low incomes. Unfortunately, housing conditions in HMOs were often some of the worst in the PRS.
Licensing allowed a local authority to adopt a much more proactive approach to tackling poor housing conditions and raising standards in the PRS. Licensing encouraged good practices and imposed a level of self-regulation as licenses would not be granted if at point of application a landlord was not able to demonstrate that they complied with fire, gas and electrical safety conditions.
Mandatory HMO licensing under Part 2 of the Housing Act 2004 operated nationwide and this applied (generally) to larger HMOs that were occupied by five or more persons in two or more households. Larger HMOs were considered to be higher risk hence the requirement for all local authorities to operate a mandatory HMO licensing regime. Sometimes it wasn't just the larger HMOs that caused concern. If a local authority was aware of demonstrable problems associated with smaller HMOs (i.e. those not meeting the mandatory definition), then it had powers under the Housing Act 2004 to designate an area or areas to be subject to additional licensing in respect of some or all HMOs not already subject to mandatory licensing. However, unlike mandatory licensing which ran indefinitely, additional licensing could only last for up to 5 years. Ealing currently had a boroughwide additional HMO licensing scheme which included HMOs occupied by four or more persons and some so called 'section 257' HMOs. This boroughwide additional licensing scheme was due to expire on 31 December 2021.
In addition to HMO licensing, where an area had demonstrable problems associated with low housing demand, poor housing conditions, ASB, deprivation, migration or crime, the Housing Act 2004 enabled local authorities to introduce a selective licensing scheme which was applicable to all private rented dwellings (typically single household dwellings) not just HMOs. As with additional licensing, selective licensing could only last for up to 5 years. Ealing currently operated selective licensing in the wards of Acton Central, East Acton, South, Acton, Southall Broadway and Southall Green and the scheme was due to expire on 31 December 2021.
The current licensing schemes had ensured that there had been good progress in improving property standards for residents living in the PRS and reducing ASB. However poor housing conditions remained prevalent in Ealing's growing PRS and many dwellings in the PRS remained unlicensed or did not meet the necessary criteria to be licensed within the existing licensing schemes.
The option of the Council not renewing both its additional and selective licensing schemes, relying on only the mandatory schemes, would lead to a deterioration in the standards of housing across the whole borough. This report provided cabinet with an overview of the provisions of the Housing Act 2004 that set out the process for the renewal of the licensing schemes and sought agreement to consult and gauge opinion with all key stakeholders that would be affected by the proposals. These are two distinct schemes that would, if introduced, operate in parallel to mandatory HMO licensing and as part of the Council's wider strategies for housing and other related issues. The decision to designate an additional HMO licensing scheme could be agreed locally by the Council's Cabinet. However, should the overall size of a renewed selective licensing scheme cover more than 20% of the geographical area or would affect more than 20% of private rented properties in the local authority area, approval from the Secretary of State would be required to proceed with the scheme.