Controversy continues over selective housing scheme with landlords and council offering differing opinions

By Nub News Reporter 30th Jan 2026

Local News by Nub News Reporter 30th Jan 2026 2

Stephen Boyling speaking at the council meeting.

THURROCK Council has insisted it will "robustly defend" its new selective licensing scheme which has been halted pending a possible judicial review over claims of inadequate consultation.

The scheme, introduced earlier this month, requires landlords in designated areas to apply for a licence — costing £1,034 for five years — with the aim of driving up housing standards and tackling rogue landlords. Enforcement powers allow the council to revoke licences where properties fail to meet minimum standards.

The project has been regarded as highly controversial and several individual landlords with a significant personal holding of properties - and others who have joined together as a collective, have take action to challenge the scheme's legitimacy and the method of its implementation. Thurrock Nub News exclusiveley reported on the controversy in detail earlier this month.

They took their case to the High Court, where a judical review is scheduled next month and in the interim the scheme is subject to an injunction.

At a full council meeting on Wednesday, Stephen Boyling, director of Montana Property Development Co. Ltd, one of Tilbury's largest private rental providers, criticised the rollout of the scheme and sought assurances it would not be implemented pending the legal review.

He made a series of allegations against the council and warned it had mishandled a formal complaint he has made.

Mr Boyling said: "As a major provider of privately rented properties in the borough, I was appalled at the complete lack of communication, transparency and adherence to government guidelines leading up to the introduction of the scheme. Attempts by managers to justify their decisions have only resulted in further serious questions."

Mr Boyling, who filed his official complaint last year, which the council rejected in November, asked whether the licensing scheme would now be halted "forthwith" pending the review.

In response, Cllr Lynda Heath, cabinet member for public protection, said the scheme was lawful, properly consulted on, and essential for improving conditions for thousands of tenants.

"The council is rightly proud of its selective licensing scheme," she said. "A challenge has been brought, but we will be robustly defending it and have applied to set aside the interim injunction."

She stressed that the High Court had issued no ruling on whether the scheme is lawful. "The court has not made any criticism of the council," she added.

Under the court order, the application process is currently suspended, and any fees already paid are being held securely pending the judge's decision on whether the case can proceed to a judicial review. The council says a further update will be issued once the court rules.

Thurrock's scheme—similar to one operating in Southend—covers 16 wards across the borough and is expected to licence more than 15,000 private rented homes. Four wards were excluded for not meeting legal thresholds.

Ms Heath said the council's priorities remain "improving housing standards, supporting responsible landlords and safeguarding tenants across the borough."

Allegations have been made aby a campaigning group of landlords, represented by a legal advisor, that the council has continued to implement its licensing policy, contacting and pressing landlords to act, which would appear to be a breach of the injunction and in contempt of the High Court. The council has robustly denied that accusation.

However, the landlords have released emails showing correspondence between the council and 'new landlords' in recent days and they they have now contacted the High Court, stating they have evidence of a breach of the injunction and calling on the High Court to take action against the council.

CHECK OUT OUR Jobs Section HERE!
thurrock vacancies updated hourly!
Click here to see more: thurrock jobs

Please Support Us Thurrock. Your Borough. Your News. Your Support Matters.

Local news is essential for our community — but it needs your support.
By becoming a monthly supporter, you’ll help us continue delivering reliable
local stories and events.
Your support makes a real difference to Thurrock.

Please Support Us Thurrock. Your Borough. Your News. Your Support Matters.

Local news is essential for our community — but it needs your support.
By becoming a monthly supporter, you’ll help us continue delivering reliable local stories and events.
Your support makes a real difference to Thurrock.

Monthly supporters will enjoy:
Ad-free experience

Comments (2)

Post comment

How can the public be expected to trust Thurrock Council on this matter? This scheme appears to be yet another revenue-generating exercise rather than a genuine attempt to improve housing standards.

Given Thurrock Council’s recent and well-publicised history of serious financial mismanagement — including the loss of hundreds of millions of pounds of council taxpayers’ money through failed investment schemes, alongside findings of governance failures and corruption — it is entirely reasonable for landlords and residents to question the council’s motives and competence. Against this backdrop, there is a real concern that this licensing scheme will be poorly administered and driven primarily by the need to raise funds, rather than to meaningfully protect tenants.

The proposed licence fee of £1,034.90 per property is excessive and significantly higher than charges levied by many London boroughs with far greater housing pressures. On top of this, my letting agent has advised that they will charge £495 plus VAT per property simply to submit the application. Combined, these costs place an unreasonable and disproportionate financial burden on landlords, particularly smaller providers.

Such costs will inevitably be passed on, directly or indirectly, to tenants, undermining the very objective the council claims to be pursuing. Until trust is rebuilt and transparency, proper consultation, and value for money are clearly demonstrated, this scheme deserves serious scrutiny and opposition.

What is missing from this debate is the real-world impact on landlords with multiple properties, particularly those who are already compliant and providing much-needed housing.

A flat, per-property licensing fee applied at scale does not operate fairly. It disproportionately penalises landlords based purely on the number of properties they hold, rather than risk or standards, creating a cumulative financial burden that many will struggle to absorb. With mortgage costs having risen sharply in recent years and rents not keeping pace with inflation in many cases, this approach risks pushing responsible landlords out of the sector altogether.

There is also understandable concern about the scale of revenue involved. Based on the Council’s own published figures, the scheme appears capable of raising in excess of £16 million. That inevitably raises questions about proportionality and purpose. Landlords are not the cause of Thurrock’s housing shortage — they are part of the solution, providing homes the Council itself cannot currently supply.

Given the Council’s well-publicised financial difficulties, including reported debt exceeding £1 billion, it is reasonable for landlords to question whether this scheme is strictly cost-reflective, or whether it risks being perceived as a way of offsetting wider financial pressures unrelated to housing standards.

If selective licensing is to command confidence, it must be clearly evidence-based, proportionate, and fair in its impact, rather than a blunt instrument that penalises those providing a vital service and ultimately reduces housing supply for residents.