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


Hundreds of low EPC landlords warned - “this cannot continue”

A council has issued a stern warning to landlords that the current situation in which hundreds of homes have non-compliant EPC ratings “cannot continue.”

Over the last year the private sector housing team of Brighton’s Labour-controlled council has done what it calls “a lot of work” to enforce Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards. 

The current MEES regulations mean that landlords must ensure their properties have an Energy Performance Certificate rating of E or above.  


In the last 12 months, 740 privately rented properties in Brighton & Hove area were found to be rated F or G on their EPC – the lowest, and non-compliant, ratings. 

“This cannot continue” says a statement from the council.

The statement goes on to say: “Landlords in the city should be aware that if they fail to make improvements and do not keep their properties up to the required standard, they risk a financial penalty of up to £5,000 per breach, per property. The council will have no hesitation in implementing these penalties should landlords continue to fail to resolve any such issue.  In addition to reducing the carbon footprint of privately rented properties, improving energy efficiency also offers tenants cheaper energy bills.”

“Our priority is always the health and safety of residents of Brighton & Hove. Failure to comply will not be tolerated. A low EPC rating often signifies related problems in the property. 

“More energy efficient properties are not only better for our environment; they are also cheaper to heat and more comfortable for tenants to live in.”   

Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.

  • George Dawes

    It's one thing having an epc on a fridge , but when you analyse it it's pretty stupid on a house

  • icon

    Easy money George £5’000, a pot of Course they’ll enforce it handy money and help to destroy us all part of the Plan.
    All those Charity’s seem to love us. Gove’s Selective Licensing egged on and encouraged by CIRH using the death of a child Awaab Ishak RIP.
    How underhand wrong and irresponsible is that when it wasn’t anything to do with Private landlords but a one bed Flat of a Housing Association in a Building owned by the Council.
    It’s all too cosy Mr Gove takes up this job in October last year if my memory serves me right,
    Then Dr P James CEO of this Charity writes to Mr Gove on the 28th November 2022 saying to introduce Selective Licensing would drive up Standards in Privately Rented Homes especially following the tragic death of Awaab Ishak and we hope our suggestion will contribute to your efforts to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
    Then by magic Gove gives Ealing Council Permission for Borough wide Selective Licensing almost immediately and introduced it on the 4th of January this year, even though they had only introduced a renewed a 5 year Selective licensing Scheme for 3 areas of the Borough in July’22.
    This is all too convenient he only gets the job in October, then gets the letter to back him up on 28th of November from this Charity with its 7000 members and hey presto all done, dusted and introduced in less than 3 months.
    The Council’s don’t need licensing so how does using this case to introduce Selective Licensing prevent Councils from letting it happen again.
    Am I allowed to say stitch up ? probably not.


    I don't understand why the parents of Awaab were not prosecuted, it was by their negligence that he died, pure and simple


    Politics Andrew? The state prosecuting a black immigrant family for the death of their own child. Shelter, Labour etc would have a field day. If someone dies in the property pin it on the landlord wherever possible.


    It seems that the Housing Association told the father to paint over the mould - which he did. He wasn't told to first remove the mould and use anti-mould paint. Consequently, the mould returned. The father then apparently painted the areas again but he was fighting a losing battle because of the extent of the dampness and mould on the walls. The housing office thought that the problem was caused by "ritual bathing", but the family said they simply took showers.

  • icon

    It would be great parents took responsibility for their families and the Buildings they occupy, keep them clean and ventilated, if there is a problem usually cased by themselves, then wash it down and remove it instead of letting it build up.
    It would be far better than having a meeting with the Home Secretary and thanking him for making laws that nothing to do with it.


    Home owners do what you have said. Renters less so. Some of them can just sit and watch it grow rather than lift a finger. Hopefully get compensation or moved to another better property. They don't try and fix it.

  • Peter Why Do I Bother

    What amazes me is the council can come and slap people about over this. When none of the roads are fixed or no one can take a call over any other issues, what’s our recourse? Zero….! Maybe we should get a group together and force a class action against councils wasting money.


    Like the council spending nearly £50,000 on 'rainbow junction' across a busy road in support of the LGBT community has cost taxpayers almost £50,000.


    Class action, legal challenge etc, yes absolutely. The NRLA should be doing this.
    It’s time the ‘ big wig influencers in the PRS stepped up and started to fight back. I have little faith in waiting for the NRLA to show any determination, but someone has to.

  • icon

    Well if they can’t enforce 700 landlords for EPC F then I wouldn’t hold out much hope after EPC C comes in 🤠🤠 . What a joke 🤡

  • icon

    Flawed EPCs aside. This just highlights the whole issue surrounding minimum standards and the RRB.
    There's no enforcement. Councils are totally impotent.
    We wouldn't be staring down the barrel of new legislation if things were just done properly.
    If all landlords provided good quality and all tenants behaved and paid their rent and ANY deviation was actually dealt with then we wouldn't be on the cusp of the end of the PRS


    There is no incentive or enforcement to make tenants behave when laws are in favour of rogue tenants who don’t pay, trash the LL’s property and still can not be evicted without long periods of stress and high costs for PRS LL, whereas a council has the powers to evict tenants.
    And council also has the powers to enter PRS LL’s property in the homeowners absence to find faults-especially when a tenant is facing a PRS LL’s eviction, threaten to fix anything and blame, recharge LL’s, but worst of all, ask judges to transfer the ownership to council!.
    PRS homes are much better quality and energy efficient than council ones not just from EPC but overall perspective.
    If the laws became fair and tenants knew that they can be evicted within six weeks, as well as landlords being penalised for unsafe properties, both sides will behave.
    Instead of only LL’s having to comply with EPC, face low rental income, pay high taxes, face mortgage arrears and bad credit history due to tenants non payments and a convoluted eviction process, PRS tenants should be legally held responsible for fixing mould due to their lifestyle, undertake minor maintenance for daily usage wear and tear by humans and pets, maintenance of gardens, driveways, indoors, outdoors structures used by the tenant and paying for regular rental increases in agreement plus vacate the property at an agreed time/day leaving it in good condition.

    Best wishes to good PRS LL’s and good tenants.

  • icon

    Ellie.Anyone would have known to remove the mould first.
    Suppose it was damp as apposed to condensation then apply damp seal (Thompson’s ok) prior to applying the anti mould paint.
    This is a Block of Flats so how about all the other Flats are they mouldy or this particular one ?.
    So the Housing Association as landlords told the father to paint over, how ridiculous is that.
    We as Private landlords have to deal with issues ourselves or pay someone to do it, or Council Prosecution us.


    I would have thought so too, Michael; there is an element of common sense involved. However, from the photos I have seen on the internet the problem looked very extensive indeed. It was all over the carpets as well as the walls and ceilings.

    There was also a mass of mould behind and above the radiators; that probably implies that the tenants had been drying clothes on the radiators and causing some condensation that way.

    If you search for "Awaab Ishak and mould" and select "images" you can see the extent of the problem.

    Apparently the estate is riddled with mould - according to the Guardian article - ‘It keeps coming back’: Rochdale estate still plagued by mould that killed toddler
    An issue seems to be water entry - not sure how prevalent that is in the estate.

    You are so right that as private landlords we have to deal with these problems ourselves - and effectively, too, so that the mould doesn't come back. And what is more, frequently the mould is caused by tenants; they then report the problem and at the same time can be very obstructive in attempts to deal with it. The mould seems to be something that they prize in certain cases - and they wouldn't dream of wiping it off themselves.


    Another factor to take into account is that some housing association/council tenants have very low disposable incomes - and there would have been a great deal of the correct type of paint needed in Awaab Ishak's flat.

    There are some anti- mould products that are very cheap, but others are more expensive. I have found Astonish Mould and Mildew remover to be effective and that can be bought for only £1 in some shops.

    In terms of damp seal I have used Polycell one coat damp seal which you can buy for about £12 for 500ml. Would cost about £35 for 2.5 litres in Wickes.

    Anti-mould paints can be quite pricey - prices start at about £30 for 5 litres. B & Q currently selling for 4 x 5 litres cans of Polar anti-mould paint for £120.

    It would probably have cost about £200 for the Housing Association to have bought the materials to have saved the little boy's precious life.

    If I, as an elderly woman, can deal with a problem effectively myself, housing officers and enforcement officers should be able to do some practical work, when it is essential. That would be far more useful than targeting private landlords who are doing their best.


    Where have you used Polycell? I have damp above a skirting. I want to paint over it and see if that works. Did it last long?

    It 'looks like rising damp'. It's not rising and no salts. I have read the DPC creams are a con. The president of the RICS said it was a myth years ago.


    Hi Nick,

    I have used polycell everywhere (although I am not sure that that is the right thing to do). I have found it to be effective and it seems to permanently block damp and mould.

  • icon

    Asthma, l am not aware it's caused by mould ! Further why didn't the parents call the doctor or 999 ?.if the housing officer said he thought it was caused by ritual bathing then he had a reason to advise that ! It's just a stichup from comrade Gove !

    Peter Why Do I Bother

    Hope the housing officer got fired and his gold plated pension took off him. Certainly should be struck off from attending any other properties and giving orders...

  • icon

    The thing about the one coat damp seal for the job it’s breathable, so that’s about it really, if some is good don’t go think more is better.


    Thanks for that advice Michael

  • icon

    As I have asked many times.

    What is the EPC of a cardboard box?

    Surely if owner occupiers can legally live in a property with an inefficient EPC then tenants should also be allowed to do so especially when there is such a shortage of housing?

    Either all energy inefficient properties should be legal or all should be illegal- but there are too many votes to risk if politicians forced owner occupiers to shell out the way they force landlords and the hapless tenants are too brainwashed by Shelter to realise they are actually paying for any " better " EPC!

  • icon

    If EPC upgrade is about reducing the carbon footprint, then should it not be that every property, whether owner owned or tenanted, should be upgraded? So why only tenanted properties? I dont understand this..


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up