A leading legal expert in landlord regulations has sharply criticised four social housing providers for avoiding significant financial penalties, while private landlords face hefty fines for similar failings.
Expert slams unequal treatment of councils and private landlords
Phil Turtle, Director of Compliance Services at Landlord Licensing & Defence, has expressed strong disapproval over the recent judgements by the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) concerning Brighton and Hove City Council, London Borough of Hackney, South Derbyshire District Council, and Ashford Borough Council. These councils were each handed a C3 grading, indicating serious failures and a need for substantial improvement. Turtle has called out these findings, describing them as “alarming safety breaches,” and questioned the lack of enforcement action against the councils.
Regulator identifies serious safety issues in social housing
The RSH’s investigations uncovered numerous safety violations across the councils’ housing stock. For example, Brighton and Hove City Council were found to have failed in ensuring electrical safety for approximately 3,600 homes, lacked adequate fire safety measures in 1,700 properties, and had accumulated a backlog of 8,000 repair cases. Similarly, Hackney Council had over 15,000 homes without valid electrical safety certificates, nearly 9,000 homes without smoke detectors, and more than 400 properties lacking carbon monoxide detectors. Additionally, Hackney reported over 1,400 cases of damp and mould.
In South Derbyshire, the council was criticised for inadequate fire risk assessments, substandard electrical safety, and the need for repairs in over 100 homes. Ashford Borough Council faced scrutiny for serious health and safety lapses, including overdue electrical checks and incomplete fire safety measures in its 4,800 homes.
Despite these grave issues, the regulator decided not to impose enforcement measures immediately. The RSH stated, “We are not proposing to use our enforcement powers at this stage but will keep this under review as Brighton and Hove CC seeks to resolve these issues.”
Private landlords face harsher consequences, says expert
In response to the regulator’s decision, Turtle has highlighted the disparity in treatment between social landlords and private landlords. He argues that had these violations occurred within the private sector, the consequences would have been severe and immediate. “Yet again councils get let off with a slapped wrist for housing failures for which the very same council would fine a private landlord out of existence,” Turtle said.
He pointed out that private landlords can face fines of up to £30,000 for not having an Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR), another £30,000 for inadequate fire alarms or precautions, and up to £30,000 for issues like damp and mould. Turtle emphasised, “If this was a private portfolio landlord, they would be looking at the best part of £100,000 in fines per property.”
Turtle further criticised the councils for imposing these fines on private landlords while failing to meet the same standards in their own properties. “The same councils that inflict these fines (which they keep for their own revenue budget) just get a slapped wrist and time to leave the tenants in mortal danger until they feel like getting around to the repairs and upgrades. It’s at best immoral. Some may say completely corrupt,” he added.
Calls for equal accountability in housing safety standards
As the debate over housing safety continues, Turtle’s comments raise serious questions about accountability and fairness in the enforcement of housing regulations. The lack of significant penalties for social landlords, despite serious safety breaches, contrasts sharply with the stringent measures imposed on private landlords, leading to concerns over the consistency of regulatory enforcement across the housing sector.
