By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.


Councils are choosing to enforce the ‘harshest options’ to punish landlords

A growing number of local authorities are using selective licensing to introduce penalties for buy-to-let landlords that go well beyond the mandatory government landlord licensing rules, according to Kirwans.

The law firm suggests that legislation introduced by part three of the Housing Act 2004 in areas affected by poor-quality rental properties, irresponsible landlords and anti-social behaviour, have enabled to local authorities to routinely pursue the most serious enforcement option open to them, which can sometimes result in unfair penalties for landlords.

David Kirwan, managing partner at Kirwans, commented: “There are a number of ways in which councils can penalise landlords who fail – for whatever reason – to comply with the rules of selective licensing. These range from providing advice, guidance and support or issuing a simple caution to prosecuting landlords through the courts and refusing or revoking licenses.


“A trend is emerging of councils choosing to enforce the harshest options as they seek to make an example of landlords who those who don’t abide by the rules.”

Kirwan explained he has acted for clients investing in property to raise additional income or to provide a pension in retirement who he says have been ‘utterly devastated’ to find themselves hauled before the courts, simply for failing to apply for a licence.

He added: “It is heart-breaking to watch some landlords going through completely unnecessary criminal proceedings, simply for failing to apply for a licence.”

In worst-case scenarios, landlords could be handed a criminal record, an order to repay 12 months’ rent, or be banned from renting out a property in the future.

Even if councils choose to avoid the courts, civil penalty fines of up to £30,000 can be imposed.

Selective licensing schemes apply to a designated area for a period of five years and landlords have to apply for a license for each home affected.

They are then awarded a licence to operate a property only after an assessment which must deem them to be ‘fit and proper’, as well as satisfy stipulations around the management and funding of the property and health and safety considerations.

The schemes, which opponents claim are a way of boosting council funds, have faced criticism for both the cost of licenses - which usually run to hundreds of pounds - and for the fact that they may drive the very rogue landlords they are supposed to weed out further underground.

They have also proved confusing for landlords, who are often unaware that their property even lies in a selective licensing area.

For those operating numerous properties across different areas, the situation can be more bewildering, as each council can create its own set of rules for each scheme.

Rogue landlords, ironically, may simply choose to avoid the licensed areas, moving their poor practices to areas where such schemes are not currently in place.

In June the government announced a review of selective licensing and how well it is working, with the findings due to be published this spring.

Kirwan commented: “While we would all agree that unethical landlords must be weeded out to ensure protection for society’s most vulnerable tenants, councils must be careful that they don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

“Rogue landlords operate in an entirely different manner to the many decent men and women, some of whom are only just entering the rental sector, who are finding their way in the rental market and may be unaware that such schemes have even been introduced in their area.

“To suddenly find themselves in a situation where prosecution with outrageous penalty fines is a distinct possibility is absolutely terrifying.

“It’s also counter-productive, as landlords are now telling me that, rather than face this sort of frightening action, they will either sell-up, or choose not to invest in property in affected areas in the first place. This will then reduce the choice of accommodation on offer for those renting, leading to a lose-lose situation for all.

“My advice to all landlords would be to check with their local council as to whether their property requires a licence, and to seek legal advice immediately if they receive a letter from their local authority threatening fines or prosecution.”

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

Poll: Do you agree that a growing number of councils are opting to enforce the ‘harshest options’ to punish landlords?


  • icon

    Licencing to push up standards, fine, but what about cost, this will in the long run be passed onto the tenant again, increased rents and increase in people sleeping in shop door ways, these people in government and councils just don't have a working brain do they?

  • icon

    Have stated it for some time the council's can be the worst offenders.
    I have flats in same Block as council owned flats. The rules and regs they imposed on me they did not adopt themselves until I named and shamed them, then they had to install Break glass key holder next to front door, fire extinguisher,fire blanket, smoke detectors. They tried to say they rent to a family of say 5 which is different to me renting to 3 individuals, sending a young person fresh out of Uni to Inspect, the mind bogles. These councils are responcible for the largest deaths in a single building ever in the UK post war! Remember Trust Not Tricks.

  • icon

    They are a disgrace incompetent and hypocrites 15 MONTHS to get planning through for a straight forward conversion from care home into 12 flats 15 MONTHS and then they wanted 88k affordable housing bung they all disgust me to the pit of my stomach.

  • icon

    Why we allow the council tax to be increased each year? Do they have the license to do this?

    • 17 January 2019 23:08 PM

    Councils are permitted to increase C Tax by 3.99% without any recourse to a local referendum.
    Therefore expect CT to increase by this amount every year.
    Then throw in the threat of a Labour Govt and a CT revaluation to see CT double.
    Expect such a Labour CT revaluation ro be unlike all other previous valuations.
    Those with the biggest houses and gardens will find they are paying considerably more.
    Homeowners of large properties and LL will be in the Labour firing line.
    Labour won't lose many votes taxing homeowners and LL till the pips squeak.
    The reason this will occur is because property has no propensity to suddenly move.
    It is an easy low hanging taxation fruit.
    Few Labour voters will care a jot over homeowners having to pay more taxes.
    We are talking about all types of property.
    Remember stupid Labour works on the basis that all property is theft.
    Therefore to tax stolen property causes no ideological problems for the incompetent communists and marxists of the stupid Labour Party.
    I'm afraid property will be taxed heavily by an incoming Labour Govt cos that is where the money is.
    Don't pay your taxes and the Govt will force the sale of your property.
    If that leaves someone homeless Labour simply wouldn't care.
    It would consider it has done well in getting rid of more evil property owning capitalists.
    If you think Brexit is an issue it will pale into insignificance if the evil Labour Party assumes power.
    We need David Miliband back and a new New Labour.
    God help the UK if that idiot Corbyn and his acolytes get into power

  • icon

    I agree with the majority of your post, but would have to question whether we need a Labour Government in any form?
    If Corbyn gets in though, the leftie John McDonnell will pillage everything we have worked for to provide for the feckless and work shy.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up