Housing Act 2004 - Improvement Statistics

Dear Sir or Madam,

Dear Sir or Madam,

With specific reference to landlord requirements and HMOs (houses
in multiple occupation) I would like the department to provide
information in relation to the following:

1. How many additional bathrooms have been built as a consequence
of this legislation?
2. How many of these additional bathrooms have
been built on joint water supplies?
3. On how many occasions have councils failed to notify neighbours
in relation to such developments? (It is a legal requirement under
the planning process to notify neighbours.)
4. Of the total properties managed under
private sector leasing scheme how many families of 5 or more
persons are housed in a property where there is only ONE bathroom?

5. How many HMO landlords have been given a "licence" as a "fit and
proper person" and how much income did this raise for councils?
6. With specific reference to landlords resident overseas could the
department explain how many landlords have been found guilty of
criminal actions against their tenants?
7. How many landlords renting to mature single adults have been
denied a licence as they have been found guilty of committing
pedophilia against their adult tenants?
8. Could the department provide details of the number of UNfit and
IMproper landlords who are renting to
groups (families and or pensioners) with "vulnerable persons"?

The provisions of this Act that demand only some landlords be
judged "fit and proper" and where they are NOT renting to
"vulnerable persons" is quite simply foolish. More ludicrous yet is
the notion that landlords resident overseas are in a position to
commit acts of pedophilia and or stand over tactics in relation to
their tenants. Could the department comment on the notion that if
the law is an ass it should be changed!

The 2004 Housing Act (England & Wales) was purportedly introduced
in an effort to "improve the private housing stock". In essence
council can intervene in the private rented market on the basis of
health and safety.

Given that the Act is about "improving the
housing stock" could the department provide information re the
following:

1. How much money have councils spent on improving
properties that form part of private leasing schemes if any?
2. How many additional bathrooms have councils built (added) to
properties on private leasing schemes?
3. How many of these properties (private leasing schemes)are
occupied by families and how many are occupied by
single persons?
4. How many of these properties (private leasing schemes)are
occupied by families of 5 or more persons?
5. How many of these properties (private leasing schemes)had TENs
served on them?
6. How many TENs have been served in total by councils.

There seems a recurrent underlyng thread in relation to this Act.
Councils have sold off their council housing and thus have no
housing to house "families". Single persons are being turfed out of
properties in order that "families" get preference for renting and
at lower rental rates.

Could the department explain WHY a house with the same number of
rooms / amenities in the same location can be rented by a family
for £600 to £1000 pounds less a month. (Perhaps this is WHY
"families" have an obesity problem!)

Could the department further explain the "logic" behind licensing
overseas landlords, particularly where they do NOT rent to
"vulnerable persons". And if this Act is about improving the
housing stock could the department provide the evidence ahove to
substantiate that this is indeed the case.

Yours faithfully,

Sheila Gibb