HL Deb 13 October 2004 vol 665 cc344-7

(1) If in the opinion of the local housing authority, the condition of a house is defective in consequence of neglect to comply with the requirements imposed by regulations under section 217 (management regulations), the authority may serve on the person having control of the house or the person managing the house a notice specifying the steps which, in the opinion of the authority, are required to make good the neglect.

(2) The notice shall require the person on whom it is served to carry out the steps specified in the notice.

(3) A person commits an offence if he fails to comply with a notice under this section.

(4) In proceedings against a person for an offence under subsection (3), it is a defence that he had a reasonable excuse for not complying with the notice.

(5) A person who commits an offence under subsection (3) is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

(6) The provisions of Part 3 of Schedule 1 (Appeals) shall apply to a notice served under this section as if it were an improvement notice (omitting paragraphs 12, 13, 17 and 18)."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the management regulations are detailed and deal with the day to day running of all HMOs, not just licensed HMOs. They are prescribed by central government. Under the Bill any breach would be a criminal offence. Breaches could be trivial. There is already excessive criminalisation of landlords under the Bill.

The current management regulations provide for criminal prosecution in the event of a breach but also allow for the service of a works notice where work is required to remedy a breach. Current government circular advice advises local authorities normally to resort in the first instance to service of a works notice rather than institute criminal proceedings in the event of a breach.

The amendment will allow service of a notice to take steps to remedy a breach, not just to carry out works as applies at present. The proposal contained in this suggested new clause would retain and improve the existing alternative of serving a notice in the event of a breach. Failure to comply with the notice would be a criminal offence. In serious cases the local authority could prosecute immediately. Serving a notice is not intended to be a precondition if there is a serious breach. Tenants are therefore protected. Indeed, the existence of a notice procedure will enable local authorities to take action to get the problem dealt with much more quickly, rather than just prosecuting. The notice procedure provides a half way house so that one does not have to resort immediately to criminal proceedings in less serious cases. I beg to move.

Lord Rooker

My Lords, I hope that I can satisfy the noble Lord. I understand the point he makes. I must say that, although I am not the daytime Minister with responsibility for this matter, I am not aware that we are receiving a large number of complaints from landlords about the Bill in the way that the noble Lord has just implied.

The amendment proposes that a local authority enforcing the management regulations can issue a notice specifying works to remedy physical defects in the condition of a house if the property was defective in consequence of neglect, to comply with the requirements imposed by the management regulations under Clause 217.

A similar amendment was tabled and debated in Committee and I pointed out then that the amendment misrepresented the purpose of the management regulations, which is to set basic management duties for HMO managers. The physical conditions of all properties, including HMOs, and housing conditions that pose a risk to the health and safety of occupants must be pursued by the powers provided under Part 1 of the Bill. We have always stressed that it is not the Government's intention to duplicate powers provided under Part 1 with management regulations powers. We do not wish it to be onerous for landlords.

Government Amendment No. 223 clarifies that management regulations may impose duties relating to repair, maintenance, cleanliness and good order on managers. This would serve the purpose of complementing the Part 1 powers by ensuring that managers are aware of their duties in taking care of situations that could develop into potential hazards. That should not be confused with the amendment, which seeks to duplicate powers available under Part 1 to combat hazards. I am happy to come back on this matter. The point has been well made that it is not our intention to duplicate the powers provided under Part 1, which is specific and applies to all properties.

Lord Hanningfield

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. As is the case with several other amendments, we shall analyse it again. I take his point about not wanting to duplicate Part 1. We shall see whether we need to return to this matter again. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 114 [General effect of final management orders: leases and licences granted by authority]:

Lord Rooker moved Amendment NO.98:

Page 82, line 24, leave out "and in" and insert— except to the extent that any of those rights or remedies would prevent the local housing authority from exercising their power under section 112(3)(c). ( ) In

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 115 [Management scheme and accounts]:

Lord Rooker moved Amendments Nos. 99 to 103:

Page 82, line 47, at end insert— (ca) the amount of any compensation that is payable to a third party by virtue of a decision of the authority under section (Compensation) in respect of any interference in consequence of the final management order with the rights of that person; (cb) provision as to the payment of any such compensation;

Page 83, line 3, leave out "relevant expenditure;" and insert"—

Page 83, leave out line 7 and insert—

Page 83, line 18, after "meet" insert "— (i)

Page 83, line 19, after "order" insert ", and

  1. "(ii) any compensation that may become payable to a third party"

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 116 [Enforcement of management scheme by relevant landlord]:

Lord Rooker moved Amendments Nos. 104 to 106:

Page 84, line 11, leave out "A relevant landlord" and insert "An affected person"

Page 84, line 25, leave out "a relevant landlord" and insert ''an affected person"

Page 84, line 27, leave out subsection (4) and insert— (4) In this section "affected person" means

  1. (a) a relevant landlord (within the meaning of section 115), and
  2. (b) any third party to whom compensation is payable by virtue of a decision of the authority under section (Compensation)."

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 118 [Revocation of final management orders]:

Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 107:

Page 85, line 28, after "any" insert "other"

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 6 [Management orders: procedure and appeals]:

Lord Rooker moved Amendments Nos. 108 to 111:

Page 219, line 34, at end insert— (aa) the decision of the authority as to whether to pay compensation to any third party, (ab) the amount of any such compensation to be paid,

Page 219, line 35, leave out "right" and insert "rights"

Page 219, line 37, leave out "an" and insert "any such"

Page 226, line 4, at end insert—

"Right to appeal against decision in respect of compensation payable to third parties

31A (1) This paragraph applies where a local housing authority have made a decision under section (Compensation) as to whether compensation should be paid to a third party in respect of any interference with his rights in consequence of an interim or final management order.

(2) The third party may appeal to a residential property tribunal against—

  1. (a) a decision by the authority not to pay compensation to him, or
  2. (b) a decision of the authority so far as relating to the amount of compensation that should be paid.