A website claims that Banning Orders on private landlords have not been served because of local government funding shortfalls.
Open Democracy says only 16 landlords in the whole of England are currently subject to banning orders “because cash-strapped councils can’t afford to take them to court.”
The site claims that Welwyn Hatfield council has handed out two, while seven other councils have handed out one banning order each: Cornwall, Telford & Wrekin, Wirral, Cambridge, Leeds, Bristol and Bournemouth. Camden in London has handed out seven.
[This omits to mention the recent Brent banning order, reported this week on Landlord Today].
Open Democracy cites an anonymous “local authority enforcement officer” - not even the local authority is named - claiming that some banned landlords continue to let properties, while other authorities do not consider applying for Banning Orders because of the legal and officer time required to push one through.
The article also quotes Giles Peaker - described as a “leading housing lawyer” saying that councils are cash strapped, which is a disincentive to seeking Banning Orders.
“It involves prosecutions, which is time-consuming and costly to local authorities. There are disincentives to use it when local authorities are cash strapped … It is very, very complex, very, very time-consuming to put together all the evidence to the standard criminal tests. It is not straightforward. You really do have to do a lot of background work and investigative work. People hide behind different companies, changing names, spellings.”
You can read the full article here.
We're excited to announce that we're working on building a shiny new website for readers of Landlord Today! As part of this process, commenting on articles will be temporarily disabled. We look forward to sharing our new and improved Landlord Today website with you shortly!
.png)
.png)
(1).png)
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
