Minutes:
The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which gave Members an update on the progress made in
implementing the recommendations of the scrutiny review into the private rented
sector.
The Board was advised by the Vice Chairman, Councillor
Norman Plumpton-Walsh, that a topic group had been formed in response to a
number of issues relating to the private rented sector including poor property
conditions, anti-social behaviour caused by private tenants and absentee
landlords who were reluctant to take action against tenants who caused problems.The group had been chaired by Councillor Pamela
Wallace, who was no longer a Member of the Board.
The
Board was further advised that the findings and recommendations of the topic
group had been reported to the Board in March 2012. At the time it was agreed that detailed cost
implications associated with the appointment of additional staff to implement
the recommendations be presented to a future meeting of the Board. However, since that time discussions had taken
place at officer level regarding the reorganisation of existing staff which
would increase the capacity within the enforcement team and negate the need to
employ additional staff. A verbal update
regarding the outcome of these discussions was given at the meeting.
Furthermore,
the report highlighted that as a result of the negotiations involved in
securing additional capacity, the team progress in implementing some of the
recommendations, particularly around targeted work had been slower than
originally anticipated. The Board noted
the recommendations outlined in paragraphs 3.2.1 to 3.2.13 of the report.
It was reported that Councillor Wallace had
submitted a statement prior to
the meeting.
Mr John Tully, Legal Services had
also issued legal advice concerning recommendation 3.1.12 (accreditation to the
property not the landlord) which could result in a risk to the Council, and as
a result of this, the statement was not read out at the meeting.
The Chairman informed the Board that a statement had been submitted, but
that this had been superseded by legal advice. The Board was given the
option of re-considering the item further in respect of paragraph 3.1.12 or to
accept a new Officer’s recommendation which was to remain with the current
system (the landlord accreditation). The Officer’s recommendation was
agreed unanimously and therefore paragraph 3.1.12 would be changed to reflect
this decision before it was submitted to the Executive Board for
approval. The Chairman requested
that a copy of the new recommendation and Appendix C to the report be
circulated to all Members of the Board.
The
following comments arose from the discussion:-
· It was noted that
the current accreditation scheme had been in operation for six years and to
date there had been no issues or problems;
· It was noted that
41 landlords had been accredited and that robust measures were in place to
address rogue landlords. It was also
noted that landlord accreditation was a voluntary scheme and it would not be
viable to introduce it as a mandatory scheme as it would involve introducing
licensing and this has not previously proved to be successful;
· Concern was
raised that there appeared to be no control over failing private landlords and
this was blighting neighbourhoods. In
response, it was reported that the Environmental Health Team dealt with such
matters and would take enforcement action, when appropriate, against rogue
landlords.
The Chairman
reported that a progress report would be presented to the 15 January 2013
meeting. He also requested that Officers
identify money to undertake a poster campaign on the landlord accreditation
scheme.
RESOLVED: That
(1)
the progress made to date and the comments raised
be noted; and
(2)
paragraph 3.2.12 to be amended and recorded as:-
the existing Landlord Accreditation Scheme be
retained; and
(3)
funding be identified to undertake a campaign on the
Landlords Accreditation Scheme.
Supporting documents: