Smaller Liverpool Licensing scheme approved for 2022

Smaller Liverpool Licensing scheme approved for 2022

11:52 AM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago 12

Text Size

After having the renewal of the city-wide Liverpool selective licensing scheme rejected by the government in 2019, Liverpool council have been successful with a smaller scheme covering 16 wards of the city. Approximately 45,000 of the original 55,000 properties will be covered.

The wards covered include: Central, Riverside, Greenbank, Kensington, Picton, Tuebrook & Stoneycroft, County, Anfield, St Michael’s, Princes Park, Kirkdale, Old Swan, Warbreck, Wavertree, Fazakerley and Everton.

The new five-year compulsory licensing scheme is to commence from April 2022, but there has been no detail yet released on the costs to landlords.

The original scheme renewal was declined due to the gross mismanagement by elected councillors but has since been handed over to commissioners

Sarah Doyle, Liverpool councillor, said: “This is brilliant news for tenants living in poor housing conditions. Too many vulnerable people in our city are in poor housing conditions, paying rent to a landlord who doesn’t carry out essential maintenance to keep them warm and safe.

“The Landlord Licensing scheme will give us regulation of private rented houses, so that we can take action when concerns are raised. There is a raft of evidence which shows that council intervention forced bad landlords into taking action to improve their properties. Poor electrical and fire safety standards, as well as damp and anti-social behaviour, contribute to poor health and mental wellbeing.”

Cabinet member for Neighbourhoods, Cllr Abdul Qadir, said: “Our new scheme will be one of the largest in the country, covering the vast majority of properties under the original programme, ensuring landlords meet their obligations, such as putting in smoke detectors and fire doors as required by law.

“The council will make no profit from the scheme. Every single pound we get from landlords will be ring-fenced, paying for our team to be out on the streets every day inspecting homes, chasing disrepair. We are determined to take the strongest action against those landlords who refuse to manage and keep their properties safe.”



Comments

by Mick Roberts

12:17 PM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago

Wow,

They still a victory then haven't they the Council. Nottingham may go this way with a few knocked off to keep Govt happy.

Be nice if anyone on here knows how the homeless is happening in Liverpool?
And the rent costs?
And more so how Benefit tenants has been affected.
And if UC is fully in Liverpool?

Cause here in Nottingham, it's nigh on impossible for Benefit tenant to get any accommodation any more.

Sarah Doyle seems on another planet. Cause if they've had it for 5 years, then why:
Too many vulnerable people in our city are in poor housing conditions, paying rent to a landlord who doesn’t carry out essential maintenance to keep them warm and safe

by Fred Lawless

12:35 PM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago

I take issue with the statement 'There is a raft of evidence which shows that council intervention forced bad landlords into taking action to improve their properties.'

I am a landlord with properties in Liverpool and during the last licensing period a problem occurred with the external soil pipe on one of my properties. A neighbour rang the council (even though they had my number) and the council contacted me and advised me of the issue. They told me if I didn't fix it within a week they would fix it and charge me. I had the problem fixed within 3 hours, not because of the threat from the council but because I wanted to fix it. No doubt the council will include this occurrence as 'a council intervention forcing a bad landlord into taking action to improve his property', when the reality is that as a good landlord I fixed it as soon as I knew about it.

So my question is how can the council claim they have 'forced bad landlords to improve properties' when their stats can't differentiate between the bad landlords forced to make repairs and the good landlords who were happy to make repairs as soon as they were informed of them.

Once again landlords become cash cows for the council.

by The Property Man

13:08 PM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago

I too am a Landlord in Liverpool with many properties in Liverpool and the last scheme done nothing !!

Good Landlords who attended to maintenance in a timely manner and treat tenants with respect was the ones left to suffer.

I know many people who had properties and didn't really care for their tenants who also didn't get contacted by the council as they didn't bother getting the License in the first place !

Why should good Landlords who have no complaints and the council can see from the last inspections that the properties are up to standard pay for Landlords who don't give a s**t !!

May i also add, not all my properties were inspected so i basically paid thousands of pounds to the council for nothing !!

Lets see the cost of this new Licence and see if the council are making money because if it is a smaller scheme they wont need as many people to run it so the License should be cheaper than the last one, lets see if it is cheaper (watch this space)

by Mick Roberts

13:50 PM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago

Reply to the comment left by Fred Lawless at 06/12/2021 - 12:35
Yes,

Nottingham Council said 21% of houses had faults, hazards.
A carpet tack loose on the stairs is a Category one hazard. It could be the tenants carpet. But because Landlord is responsible for stairs carpets, the statistics go down as Bad Landlords fault. Looks good for the Councils numbers.

by Luke P

14:43 PM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago

Reply to the comment left by Fred Lawless at 06/12/2021 - 12:35
Also, a week is not particularly long.

by David Price

18:59 PM, 6th December 2021, About a month ago

I have a clause in my tenancy agreement ' . . . rent plus any charges and taxes levied by local or central governmnet' If there is any licencing in my area my tanants will be charged. If the LA charges by the week then I will pass this on as a weekly charge, if it is levied as a single charge covering five years than the tenant will be charged the lump sum.

by Mick Roberts

5:48 AM, 7th December 2021, About a month ago

Reply to the comment left by David Price at 06/12/2021 - 18:59
Brilliant David, some Nottingham Landlords did that. And if not in tenancy, they verbally told 'em the Council has gave u a rent increase.
Wonder how it would stack up now with the banning of fees if in tenancy.

by David Price

9:11 AM, 7th December 2021, About a month ago

"Wonder how it would stack up now with the banning of fees if in tenancy."
This is not a fee charged by the landlord but a tax imposed by the Local Authority and as such should be legitimate!

by JTH

12:16 PM, 7th December 2021, About a month ago

Reply to the comment left by Fred Lawless at 06/12/2021 - 12:35
If I recall correctly looking at the break down of the stats from the last scheme that 'administration' was the highest recorded offence. So nothing to do with the safety or condition of the property.

What did the money from the last scheme spent on? Despite issuing FOI requests this information has not been provided.

Once again good landlords are being forced to create money for the council to do something they already have the power to do under other legislation, gas safe, electrical safety, fire safety, environmental health, energy performance etc.

by Jessie Jones

9:16 AM, 11th December 2021, About a month ago

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 07/12/2021 - 05:48
"Wonder how it would stack up now with the banning of fees if in tenancy."

Yes Mick, I think that there is a danger in falling foul of the Tenant Fees Act 2019.

I intend to simply increase the rent by the amount as the Licence fee, spread over the period of the licence, including the cost of the interest on the upfront payment. I will do this when I serve the Section 13 notice for the increase in rent. I tend to do a covering letter when I send these notices out and that is the opportunity to explain the reason for the rent increase. 2% will be the 'cost of living' increase this year, and 3% will be for the additional cost of the licence, making a total of 5%.
I hope that so long as it is clear that the increase is still part of the rent, and not another 'fee', I think we will be clear of the Tenant Fees Act.
If we explain to the tenant the reason for such a hefty increase in rent, and by identify the name of the councillor who is responsible for Selective Licensing, then the tenants can make an informed decision at the next council elections.

1 2

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