THURROCK Council has now renewed implementation of its new selective licensing scheme aimed at tackling rogue landlords.

The scheme has courted significant controversy and opposition - with complaints from some local multiple property landlords that it is ill-thought out and punitive to tenants, while many smaller group or individual property owners signed up to a consortium to take a legal fight to the council.

That legal action halted the scheme in its tracks in January when an injunction was imposed on the council.

The council was supposed to stop taking action related to the scheme immediately though some landlords protested they were ignoring the injunction, a claim the council denied.

The m,atter came before the High Court this week and last night, at a meeting of the council's cabinet., leader Cllr Worrall said the council's plauibility had been proven and the scheme was no in force again.

She told members: "I have a statement tonight that I'd like to read out. The statement is on the selective licensing announcement.

"We are pleased to announce that the High Court judge has decided to refuse permission for the judicial review of the council's selective licensing policy to proceed.

"The judge also decided that the council can recommence its implementation of the scheme and we will be in contact with landlords about when this will take place including any new deadlines.

advertisement

"We were confident that the High Court would agree with the council's legal position and we are just sorry that the claim has led unnecessarily to a lengthy period of uncertainty for landlords and tenants.

"We are pleased to be able to move forward with this important scheme that will make a real difference to tenants, encourage good landlords and improve the lives of people living close to private rented properties.

"I'd like to thank officers for the work that they did on that piece of work."

The scheme requires landlords in designated areas to obtain a five year licence costing £1,034.

The council says is designed to drive up housing standards, reduce anti social behaviour and target the small minority of landlords failing to meet legal obligations. Its critics say it is little more than a cash-raiser for the council that will not raise standards, merely raise renatl proices as the cost is passed on.

Thurrock Council expects more than 15,000 privately rented homes across 16 wards to fall within the licensing areas, while four wards were excluded for not meeting statutory thresholds.

The initiative has faced strong opposition from parts of the borough's landlord community. Earlier this month, Montana Property Development Co. Ltd director Stephen Boyling, one of Tilbury's largest private rental providers, criticised the council for what he described as "a complete lack of communication, transparency and adherence to government guidelines" during the scheme's development.

The case for indepepent landlords has been led and co-ordinated by Akisia Divine, who is not a qualified barrister, but describes herself as a McKenzie Friend, a person who provides moral and practical support to a litigant in court but is not permitted to provide formal legal advice or act as a legal representative.

She continues to assert the case is not defeated and today (Thursday, 19 February) told Thurrock Nub News: "There has been no hearing and the judicial review has not been lost. Permission was refused on the papers only, which is an initial administrative stage. That is not a final determination of the case and does not involve a hearing or oral argument.

"Following receipt of the paper refusal, I have taken the formal procedural step of requesting an oral renewal of permission, which is expressly provided for under the court rules. That application is now before the Administrative Court, and we are awaiting a hearing date, at which the Claimant will be represented.

"In parallel, the Court has previously granted interim injunctive relief, which remains part of the procedural history of the case. The matter is therefore still live and actively progressing through the court process."

She denied that the local landlords would have been better served by employimng a barrister (Kings Counsel)., saying: "This stage does not require a KC, and it is not unusual — particularly in public law cases involving community groups — for matters to be advanced initially by litigants in person. Decisions about representation are strategic and stage-dependent.

"The group's position is straightforward: The legality of the scheme remains contested, the court process is ongoing, and the next step is an oral hearing before a judge. Until that takes place, it would be incorrect to characterise the case as concluded."

Today the council issued the following statement to Thurrock Nub News: "Judicial review is a two-stage process: claimants must first get permission to pursue the claim before proceeding to a substantive hearing whether or not a decision is lawful.

"In this case, a High Court judge has refused permission for the claim to proceed, and consequently the application for interim relief (the injunction). Permission is very often determined on the papers without a hearing.

"The claimant has a right to apply for the reconsideration of that decision but the request does not affect the court's decision to refuse permission. As a result, any restriction on the council's ability to implement the scheme is lifted.

 "Finally, the claimant's application that the council was in contempt of the previous injunction, which Nub News previously covered, was dismissed."