Selective Licensing of Landlords

[g jones]

Originally Posted by Eafield

Mr Jones has given a great response to my thread!

You will undoubtedly make a good MP, you have made no comment nor replied to any of the points I have raised.

Your response sounds as though you are the judge, jury and executioner!

Yes master, I’ll, take my medicine.

Mr Jones refers to the bad landlords, he perhaps hasn’t read my thread properly, I agree with Licensing, if correctly implemented.

Are you not a landlord yourself, Mr Jones and was it not your flyer that accused all landlords of Greed. Perhaps you could enlighten us all as to your motivation for becoming a landlord?

No sorry I don't. I have one house.

It is difficult to answer a plethora of questions and half accusations.

You mid the point BTW. You are looking at through Conservative neo liberal spectacles. How it affects the individual landlord or tenant.

This is about the wider community and social responsibility.

I have worked hard on a number of policies to help landlords as a side.

Mr Eafield. You cannot as an industry expect to make money off the backs of poor communities and not expect them to countenance the lack of social conscience within the industry.

Have you seen what your industry has done to Woodnook?

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Eafield

Garinda thanks for your limited responce, my appologies for the typo the date should have read 31/03/2010 although if it had have been the 31/04/2010 then despite my obvious time travel skills my point would have been the same. Our councillor friends have been telling the world this scheme is up and running prior to having had the official go ahead. If sarcasm was as high on my agenda as it is yours I might well imply it is them that are capable of your time travel skills. Thanks again for your constructive points though.

The scheme was actually approved at a meeting of Hyndburn Borough Council's Cabinet on 3 March 2010 see agenda below
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...da__030310.pdf
and also the minutes of the meeting
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...tes_030310.pdf
Minute number 506 refers.
The scheme was on the agenda of the Council meeting on 30 March 2010, but was only a report of a key decision informing the Council meeting of the Cabinet decision, this is a link to the report presented -
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...y_Decision.pdf

So your remarks about Labour councillors telling everyone of the decision are disingenuous.
So maybe you should apologise for your ignorance of the correct information.

Also it might be helpful if you could inform everyone, which HBC councillors are landlords.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by claytonender

The scheme was actually approved at a meeting of Hyndburn Borough Council's Cabinet on 3 March 2010 see agenda below
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...da__030310.pdf
and also the minutes of the meeting
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...tes_030310.pdf
Minute number 506 refers.
The scheme was on the agenda of the Council meeting on 30 March 2010, but was only a report of a key decision informing the Council meeting of the Cabinet decision, this is a link to the report presented -http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloads/Item_19_-_Report_of_Key_Decision.pdf

So your remarks about Labour councillors telling everyone of the decision are disingenuous. So maybe you should apologise for your ignorance of the correct information.

So you didn't make a mistake, even though the person accusing you did, by posting a nonesense date, and you had indeed posted the correct, factual information?

I think a humble apology is the very least that you're owed.

[steeljack]

Where do the "bad tenants" with youngsters go when they have been evicted under the new rules , cannot for the life of me see HBC allowing a tent city being built on Broadway , are they going to take the homeless kids into care (split up a family) or re-allocate the family to a "Council" owned property a few streets away

[cashman]

Originally Posted by steeljack

Where do the "bad tenants" with youngsters go when they have been evicted under the new rules , cannot for the life of me see HBC allowing a tent city being built on Broadway , are they going to take the homeless kids into care (split up a family) or re-allocate the family to a "Council" owned property a few streets away

Dont suppose execution is being considered?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by steeljack

Where do the "bad tenants" with youngsters go when they have been evicted under the new rules , cannot for the life of me see HBC allowing a tent city being built on Broadway , are they going to take the homeless kids into care (split up a family) or re-allocate the family to a "Council" owned property a few streets away

They're given one new crisp five pound note, then shipped of to the former colonies.

Please make sure you're nice to them.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by garinda

So you didn't make a mistake, even though the person accusing you did, by posting a nonesense date, and you had indeed posted the correct, factual information?

I think a humble apology is the very least that you're owed.

More chance of being struck by lightening! seems to have done one after reading it.

[Eafield]

Originally Posted by g jones

I received a letter from the minister in the middle of January saying approval.

I believe what I am supporting is right and I am not for turning. If landlords want to jack up prices then a Labour Council will act to bring prices down.

We are more than aware of the matrix of issues and intend not to be a sit back council or one frightened of lobby groups

I am not against you on this concept! We need to improve standards of many things in today’s society, but are we right to say that all landlords are responsible for the state of our housing problems in Accrington.

Poor housing is an issue and needs to be dealt with, however the current plan is not even-handed?

What will happen Oct 2010 onwards?

Bad landlords will dodge the scheme or simply dispose of the assets they are unable to let, these "people" will then simply move on to other areas, that have not been encompassed by your scheme. More rented in other areas, those areas will quickly worsen, particularly the ones that should already be included in the scheme.

This current scheme stinks of "NIMBY". Does it not make sense that we target the bad landlords and thus prevent them from simply moving the problem from one street to another.

Your current scheme requires a landlord to ensure poor quality tenants are dealt with and removed if necessary, where exactly do you think they will then go?

We should also be considering the fact that “truly good landlords" can be unfortunate enough to have bad tenants from time to time. Nice couple moves in two years no problems, girlfriend leaves partner, partner goes of the rails and falls in with the wrong crowd and becomes a bad tenant. Who’s fault is this? The Landlords, apparently.

We are trying to make landlords responsibly for the shortcomings of some elements of society, should there not be some form of combined and targeted effort to improve bad landlords and bad tenants alike.

Should we will be sending all speeding tickets to Audi for building the R4!

Isn’t it embarrassing that as a country we do not have the ability to apply a little more common sense to things.

On the subject of a labour council reducing rents, perhaps you could elaborate how in a free democratic market you intend to do this.

You have previously quoted HBC as charging £63 and doing a better job than the private sector. This a somewhat arrogant statement, considering you are not privy to the conduct of the entire private sector, however you could perhaps elaborate on how well HBC would do without the private sector considering there are currently just 4 properties available to let vie the HBC website ( 2 of which are 1 bed flats).

I should very much like to discuss the matter further, I did try to call you although you advised you were not able to speak with me for the next three weeks.

Selective licensing should most certainly be introduced, but can you not concur that the current scheme will not be effective and that it would take little effort to take further consultation on the way in which this scheme is introduced.

[Eafield]

Originally Posted by g jones

No sorry I don't. I have one house.

It is difficult to answer a plethora of questions and half accusations.

You mid the point BTW. You are looking at through Conservative neo liberal spectacles. How it affects the individual landlord or tenant.

This is about the wider community and social responsibility.

I have worked hard on a number of policies to help landlords as a side.

Mr Eafield. You cannot as an industry expect to make money off the backs of poor communities and not expect them to countenance the lack of social conscience within the industry.

Have you seen what your industry has done to Woodnook?

FYI I was a labour supporter, I may well still be, however you fail to grasp the content of my argument. Again I am not against Selective Licensing. I am against the current scheme.

On the subject of Woodnook, perhaps we could discuss its turning point and Salford Housing association, purchasing half of the area under the cover of Space Ltd, receiving government grants for refurbishment and moving all the scum bags they didn’t want on their own door step in.

A similar knock on effect I should anticipate will come from the proposed scheme.

I am not a Conservative neo liberalist and politics are not relevant to my views on this subject, please remove the labour cap and simple consider my points objectively.

As per my last thread, I would welcome as would many landlords and normal decent individuals, the opportunity to “discuss” the scheme further.

[Eafield]

Originally Posted by claytonender

The scheme was actually approved at a meeting of Hyndburn Borough Council's Cabinet on 3 March 2010 see agenda below
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...da__030310.pdf
and also the minutes of the meeting
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...tes_030310.pdf
Minute number 506 refers.
The scheme was on the agenda of the Council meeting on 30 March 2010, but was only a report of a key decision informing the Council meeting of the Cabinet decision, this is a link to the report presented -
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...y_Decision.pdf

So your remarks about Labour councillors telling everyone of the decision are disingenuous.
So maybe you should apologise for your ignorance of the correct information.

Also it might be helpful if you could inform everyone, which HBC councillors are landlords.

My information was supplied on two separate occasions by the current head of licensing Mr Julian Hickinbottom (apologies if not spelt correctly) Please feel free to check what I have been advised with him directly . The fact that the cabinet agreed the scheme, does not take away from the point that formal approval from the DoC was still to be received.

I do however apologise for making a big deal over this point and for the record concur the ultimate outcome would not have altered.

Perhaps you could comment on all of my other points.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Eafield

We should also be considering the fact that “truly good landlords" can be unfortunate enough to have bad tenants from time to time.

I did helpfully supply a case study, much earlier in the thread, from an area where the scheme's up and running, that positively addresses just those issues. Much to the landlord's delight.

Originally Posted by garinda

Middlesbrough Case Study – A positive response from a landlord
The tenant, her family and visitors to her home, had been responsible for criminal offences and serious anti-social behaviour over a long period of time. A range of legal measures had been used in an effort to curb their criminal and anti-social behaviour, including two separate custodial sentences for the tenant for dealing class A drugs, and the granting of Anti Social Behaviour Orders for the two eldest sons.
The nature of the complaints received included, drug dealing, gang nuisance, threatening and intimidating behaviour towards neighbours, verbal abuse, criminal damage and graffiti. Due to the refusal of the landlord to work with the Housing Respect Team, the tenant her family and visitors to the property were able to continue to behave with impunity. Residents, afraid of reprisals, were reluctant to report any breaches. However, with the implementation of selective licensing the landlord began to work with the council.
He accompanied the Enforcement Officer on joint home visits and completed a tenancy breach interview. He reinforced the message that the tenant would be evicted if their anti-social behaviour continued and referrals were completed to the appropriate support agencies. Unfortunately, the family refused to co-operate so the landlord was obliged to serve a Section 8 Notice and apply to the Court for possession of the property. Because the tenant lost her tenancy due to her behaviour, she was deemed intentionally homeless and the local authority, therefore, had no statutory obligation to rehouse her. Consequently she lost her priority rehousing established through the regeneration clearance programme. She also lost the right to the displacement compensation payment of £4,400.
LACORS - Subject Content Details


Well I've trawled through tons of information regarding various resident's groups in the areas where landlord licences are already up and running, and there seems to be nothing but praise from the honest, hardworking residents who live in these area, and who apparently have only seen improvements in the quality of life that has resulted from landlord's licences.

Most honest, hardworking, private landlords seem similarly pleased, in having more control about what goes on in their properties.

If this means decent people, who are trying to bring up their families, have less drug dealers as neighbours, which most certainly is the case where it's up and running, that can only be a good thing.

[MargaretR]

I would like to know where are these 'three one bedroomed flats advertised on the HBC website'. I have looked and not seen. I am registered with B-with-us and each week there are between 30 and 40 tenancies advertised in the 'social housing' sector.

I did not think that HBC retained any housing when the big transfer to Hyndburn Homes happened a few years back.

[Eafield]

Originally Posted by garinda

I did helpfully supply a case study, much earlier in the thread, from an area where the scheme's up and running, that positively addresses just those issues. Much to the landlord's delight.

Your case study does noting more than helpfully provide backbone to my argument and I am amazed that this is not grasped by you.

Your case study saw a landlord ultimately evict what was a bad tenant, yes he maybe took too long to do it and yes the council had to get involved, however the end result was that she was evicted.

Where did she go?, because the council didn’t house her!

We can be pretty certain she isn’t living in a cardboard box, so "there it is" my friend she’s moved in next door to some other poor sole within a district that is obviously not licensed six months later.

You better hope you live in a licensed area. If not now’s the time to be nice to your neighbours, because the next time one falls into debt and sells to an investor you could be living next to your case study.

Oh and under current law it will take even the best landlord at least five months to evict her for you.

Good luck!

[garinda]

'we are committed to caring for your property in your absence and to maximising your financial return'
Home.co.uk: Eafield & Maple Website

I think for many residents, living in areas blighted by problems associated with poorly tenanted properties, many with absentee landlords hundreds of miles away, who bought into the area purely to profit, somethings are more important than pounds and pence.

Fot those honest, hardworking people, trying to raise their families, quality of life rates much higher than profit.

[Eafield]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

I would like to know where are these 'three one bedroomed flats advertised on the HBC website'. I have looked and not seen. I am registered with B-with-us and each week there are between 30 and 40 tenancies advertised in the 'social housing' sector.

I did not think that HBC retained any housing when the big transfer to Hyndburn Homes happened a few years back.

30-40 from Darwen to Nelson yes, I am referring to Accrington and the proposed licensed area.