Additional Licensing Judicial Review

Additional Licensing Judicial Review

17:45 PM, 3rd October 2014, About 7 years ago 24

Text Size

Breaking News from Enfield High Court Will Additional Licensing Be Outlawed?

I just got off the phone and I’m delighted to report that Mr Constantinos Regas was successful in getting permission to proceed to with his Judicial Review at the Royal Courts of Justice this morning. Though not everything went his way, the judge didn’t accept his application in full, however he is clear to proceed and challenge additional HMO licensing, the judge said that:

“Additional HMO Licensing was arguably unlawful” and probably shouldn’t be imposed on the people of Enfield

It is not known if Enfield council will be withdrawing their scheme to license the whole borough in the light of these proceedings or will spend more tax payers money to fight on at a full Judicial Review hearing against Mr Regas. One thing they have to bear in mind is senior counsel Mr Richard Clayton QC has agreed to assist Mr Regas on no win no fee basis at that hearing.

Will Additional Licensing Be Outlawed?



Comments

by All BankersAreBarstewards Smith

12:25 PM, 6th October 2014, About 7 years ago

thank goodness at least one judge has some common sense..... but November seems Very early for a thorough full judicial review........

by chris wright

12:32 PM, 6th October 2014, About 7 years ago

whats very odd is that the council said at the hearing that they can't run the scheme if they dont get additional licensing approved, so if the council proceed with just selective licensing then they are being irrational which is err.... grounds for JR !!!

by All BankersAreBarstewards Smith

12:34 PM, 6th October 2014, About 7 years ago

Councils..... there is no understanding their logic..... sighs

by chris wright

13:42 PM, 6th October 2014, About 7 years ago

Well Enfield councils own website highlights a u-turn on housing policy barely one day after making a statement infront of a high court judge!

Cllr Ahmet Oykener, Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Regeneration, said: “This is an important victory for Enfield Council"

His legal team said Enfield can't proceed if they don't get additional licensing and they didn't - so it seems the council are either lying (would they?) or passing early judgement on the November hearing which has yet to happen or are happy to have selective licensing without the additional element in direct contrevention of their stated policy and detailed consultations!

by Joe Bloggs

10:21 AM, 7th October 2014, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "chris wright" at "06/10/2014 - 12:21":

hi,

can you (if poss) please explain what they mean by:
'Enfield Council had originally claimed that both schemes were necessary, in order to prevent perverse incentives for landlords to switch between the two types of lets.'?

dont understand that at all. surely if there was no additional licensing scheme, then small HMO's would be licensed under the selective licensing scheme????

by chris wright

10:44 AM, 7th October 2014, About 7 years ago

Joe - small HMO's are defined in law so cannot be subject to selective schemes as per Section 56 of the 2004 Housing Act - they have their own scheme (additional) in general terms the conditions are:

The property is occupied by 3 or more people and
The tenants form 2 or more households and
It falls within the Additional Licensing designated area

So basically Enfield - should they proceed with only selective they are doing a massive u-turn on their housing policy and are being irrational - hardly the victory being reported by them.

by chris wright

10:50 AM, 7th October 2014, About 7 years ago

arguably all multi-generational households could be defined as small HMOs.....quite popular in areas like Enfield

by Joe Bloggs

10:57 AM, 7th October 2014, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "chris wright" at "07/10/2014 - 10:44":

THANKS BUT I DONT THINK THAT IS CORRECT. I BELIEVE THERE IS AN OVERLAP BETWEEN SELECTIVE AND ADDITIONAL LICENSING REGIMES. THIS IS WHAT THE NLA RAISED IN THEIR OBJECTION TO LB NEWHAM'S SIMILAR SCHEME. I.E.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/34/section/79

Licensing of houses to which this Part applies

(1)This Part provides for houses to be licensed by local housing authorities where—
(a)they are houses to which this Part applies (see subsection (2)), and
(b)they are required to be licensed under this Part (see section 85(1)).
(2)This Part applies to a house if—
(a)it is in an area that is for the time being designated under section 80 as subject to selective licensing, and
(b)the whole of it is occupied either—
(i)under a single tenancy or licence that is not an exempt tenancy or licence under subsection (3) or (4), or
(ii)under two or more tenancies or licences in respect of different dwellings contained in it, none of which is an exempt tenancy or licence under subsection (3) or (4).
THE LAST SUB SECTION MAKES IT CLEAR (I THINK) THAT ADDITIONAL LICENSING APPLIES TO SMALL HMO'S. HAPPY TO BE CORRECTED.

by Joe Bloggs

10:59 AM, 7th October 2014, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "chris wright" at "07/10/2014 - 10:50":

again i dont think thats correct. there are very specific rules on what constitutes a relation/ family and 'multi generational households' would not be an HMO.

by chris wright

11:11 AM, 7th October 2014, About 7 years ago

not sure it works Joe as that would mean additional licensing as defined in law is irrational especially if those properties can then be defined or reclassified as selective on a whim, why would the 2004 HA be drafted to empower additional schemes if it lacks a clear definition then LL's operating in addtional schemes areas could claim the reverse i.e. we are a selective household if it was that easy. I note your point about the family - multi gen.


Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?

BECOME A MEMBER