Meeting: Corporate HMO Group

Date: 8th December 2010

Attendance: Cllr Nilgun Canver (CC)

Cllr John Bevan (JB)

Cllr Toni Mallett (TM)

Cllr Gina Adamou (GA)

Cllr Zena Brabazon (ZB)

Cllr Stuart McNamara (SM)

Marc Dorfman (MD)

Eubert Malcolm (EM)

Sule Nisancioglu (SN)

Steve Russell (SR)

Dasos Maliotis (DM)

Apologies: None

Minutes: Tom Redfearn (TR)

ITEM / ACTION
  1. Update on current projects and landlord/tenant info pack and on proposal for further HMO licensing project
Steve Russell introduced, presenting the group with a paper outlining updates on a range of projects including training for landlords, liaison with agents, tenants manual and street survey.
SR demonstrated the tenants pack that we’re proposing to provide to each landlord of an HMO which should be kept in premises. SR is currently providing presentations to a range of groups. All consider tenants packs to be very good. SR stated that if anyone considers further information should be included it can be. Pack should include Cllr surgery details, SNT contacts and school enrolment details.
Consultation on the additional licensing scheme is going live this week and will be live for approximately 12 weeks. Will go to Cabinet in May and implemented in September. SR proposes rolling out to other wards after Harringay.
ZB suggested that officers from Council Tax attend this meeting. Noted empty properties don’t have an income target but do receive an income. ZB proposed that some of this income be used for the discretionary licensing project. Being responsible for Council Tax, Cllr Goldberg should also attend
SM would like to see some case studies regarding the discretionary licensing project which will give some more strength to the argument for rolling out.
Noted that 23 unlicensed HMOs in Harringay have been found so far.
  1. Update on current changes to legislation for HMOs
SN provided a discussion paper regarding the use of Article 4 Direction for HMOs in the borough. From October 2010 small shared houses or flat occupied by between 3 and 6 unrelated individuals who share basic amenities, a change of use from a dwellinghouse to a small house in multiple occupation is possible under permitted development rights and planning applications are not needed. HMO proposals with more than 6 occupants will be subject to normal planning controls.
If a local authority believes there is a problem with HMOs in a particular area, they will be able to use Article 4 powers to require planning permission. Where Article 4 directions are used, there are costs for local authorities including the liability to pay compensation where a planning application is refused or granted subject to conditions for development which would previously have been allowed.
SM stated that we appear to be discussing only licensed HMOs and that all HMOs (whether licensed or not) should be considered in the same way. He doesn’t believe we have enough information as yet to say whether or not we have the need for Article 4.
SN advised that due to the current lack of evidence we’re currently unable to do Article 4. Collecting that information will cost money.
SR noted that although there are a lot of HMOs they don’t always meet the criteria to be licensed, hence aren’t counted.
Noted Article 4 paper is a discussion paper. MD stated that we have begun to gather more evidence. We’re GIS-mapping households with different surnames.
MD advised that there is evidence that the government’s policies are already driving up rents here and might lead to migrants from Central London to beyond Haringey and to the outer edges of London.
Noted we’re currently suffering blockages to develop new private and social sector housing.
Agree with the drive to ensure private sector landlords manage their properties better.
SN discussion is whether Article 4 is the right tool that will produce the right results.
Noted will only deal with future HMOs and not current and that they would only impact on smaller HMOs (those with 3-6 residents) and not larger HMOs
Noted that discretionary licensing research could contribute towards evidence base for article 4.
SM proposes we drop the distinction between licensed and unlicensed HMOs for the purpose of this issue. We also need clarification of what form the 12 month consultation will take and ensure that it doesn’t pre-judge a decision. It would also be useful to do spot checks in certain streets in Tottenham wards.
Noted that licensed/unlicensed HMOs are legal terms but this group can recognise that an HMO is an HMO, whether licensed or not.
Noted a consultation would be resource-intensive and we’re currently reducing in size.
Current s106 money wouldn’t be able to be used for this. Though future s106 monies could potentially.
Intensive research needs to be done before we even begin consultation.
Noted that consultation in a small area would consist of leaflet drops.
JB felt that once we have more information from the discretionary licensing exercise we’d be in a better position to make an informed decision on this.
SR to write to universities to see if they had a student who would be interested in doing some project work on this.
Following discretionary research we’ll do a desktop exercise and sampling.
ZB suggests keeping Article 4 on the agenda and having this group meet more frequently.