The Government's Enforcement Concordat is all very well for good-natured relations between local government and its clients, but is it strong enough to tackle problem areas? Unconvinced that it packed the punch to pull the private rented sector into line, Brent set about giving the agreement some teeth. EHJ reports

Like many inner city councils, Brent faces an uphill battle raising housing standards. The proportion of properties in a poor state, especially in the private rented sector, is well above London and the national averages, according to the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. Brent LBC found one in four houses in its private rented sector "statutorily unfit for human habitation" when it was conducting a sample survey along EHCS guidelines. The knock-on effects - educational under-performance, high crime rates and a poor quality of health, create a cocktail of disadvantage for residents. For this reason, Brent is keen to address the situation firmly and effectively.

The Government's proposed Enforcement Concordat, which first appeared in March 1998, was revamped last year because of low take-up and the Cabinet Office's conviction that a code of good enforcement practice was urgently needed. The then cabinet minister, Dr Jack Cunningham, explained the importance of authorities adopting it: "What is needed is a cultural change in enforcement - a new approach that emphasises prevention before prosecution and dialogue between businesses and enforcers, so that business people are not penalised for innocent mistakes."

But Brent doubted whether this softly-softly approach would work in practice for their private sector housing team, especially as many landlords were already plainly out of step with good practice principles. The team had good reason to be sceptical, having previously tried its own set of home-grown concordat style agreements under the Total Quality Management programme, and failed to achieve the desired result. Officers felt the use of a single prescribed format - with no regard for the varying nature of the situations and markets it would be applied to - was a recipe for disaster.

The council voiced its concerns to the Cabinet Office, and offered to draft a supplement to the Concordat which might prove a workable model for other areas with private housing sector difficulties. The Cabinet Office said yes. This was an opportunity the council had been after for a while - in its responses to the Housing Fitness Standard Consultation Paper and the HMO Licensing Consultation Paper, Brent officers had repeatedly listed their concerns over the practical nature of putting the principles into operation.

Roots of the problem
Any concordat drawn up by Brent had to follow the underlying philosophy of the main concordat but, of equal importance, it had to meet the aims of Brent's private rented housing strategy; the main thrust of which was that private sector conditions must improve. Brent's housing situation is bleak enough to have earned the title "slum city" from the local press. A recent stock condition survey indicated that housing conditions had significantly deteriorated across all private sectors. And this has happened despite the introduction of a number of important changes:

• a control registration scheme for HMOs
• training courses for landlords
• forums for landlords and tenants
• an accreditation scheme designed to benefit qualifying landlords, but since abandoned by councillors due to a poor response from applicants
• a large neighbourhood renewal area
• a fully supported and ambitious Housing Investment Programme over the period in question and
• levels of enforcement activity aimed at matching and surpassing Audit Commission indicators for environmental health housing functions.

Mistakes are of course unavoidable, but there were none to a degree that could account for the scale of deterioration. The root cause was poverty, with an increasing number of people obliged to live in the cheapest accommodation they could find in the private sector, often let by unscrupulous and opportunistic landlords who hadn't the slightest concern for their tenants nor respect for their obligations. In other cases they were simply unable to keep up with the high maintenance costs. On top of these initial difficulties, the council's efforts were compromised by the large number of rogue landlords who failed to comply with enforcement procedures.

During 1999, Brent introduced several schemes, which are key to its firm approach to the sector:

• An HMO control registration scheme which legally requires persons to seek registration of properties covered by the scheme. Registration may be refused if the council considers that that person is not a "fit and proper" person. Usage without registration is a summary offence.
• A compulsory purchase order policy which will be enforced whenever owners fail to quickly rectify unacceptable situations.
• An informal "Preferred Status" scheme applicable to private landlords, which rewards landlords who exercise good practice by offering a range of benefits from invitations to partnership ventures to first priority on house renovation.

Rights and responsibilities
What Brent's private housing services concordat seeks to do, in effect, is to spell out explicitly duties that housing owners have to others, especially with regard to health and safety, and to emphasise Brent Council's strict attitude towards compliance. The council is prepared to stamp its authority whenever it feels that this is not being adhered to (compulsory purchase will be made should it be required). Rewards and penalties are measured by an analysis of business performance. On nuisance and certain other offences, it intends to bring tenants to account.

Fundamentally, Brent's concordat - in its own words - "is designed to operate towards the advantage of good practice owners and the disadvantage of those who continuously default on their obligations, neglect repairs, place others at risk, act maliciously towards others (especially those to whom they owe wholly the reverse behaviour); and otherwise fall below reasonable expectations in business practice."

If adopted, it will be used in court proceedings as, though it does not and cannot create any new legal liabilities, no rogue property owner or offender can be assured of any leniency when it comes to judgement and sentencing. It has received the approval of the Small Landlords Association, which favours it particularly in view of its own expressed aims. The principles of good enforcement practice that it sets down have been met with approval by the Cabinet Office's Regulatory Impact Unit; and its support and encouragement clearly demonstrate the value of civil servants and local government officers working together. At the same time, the principles also reflect the unit's acknowledgement that the Enforcement Concordat initiative needs to be practical, and consequently must not be treated as an exercise in pedantry or inflexibility. There is an underlying agreement that regulation is a means to an end, not an end in itself and that achieving the desired outcomes is far more important than simply recording them. The fact that the latter has been the general pattern of practice in the past means that a new approach is urgently required.

At the time of writing, Brent's concordat is still just a discussion paper awaiting further consultation before a formal introduction as a tenure-neutral treaty. Technically, it should become a housing specific supplement to the original Enforcement Concordat.

Of course, no-one believes this concordat alone will transform the state of housing repair. Fundamental changes in attitude on the part of financial institutions acting in the housing sector - in relation to asset values and maintenance, and the development of suitable assistance packages - could go much further. But its use would be a clear aid and has great potential for supporting Brent Council's best value aims. The council recently became the 200th local authority to formally adopt the main Enforcement Concordat and the Cabinet Office has recognised the council's landmark status, which would not have been possible without the groundwork established by the environmental services team.

Anyone interested in obtaining a copy of the Housing Concordat should contact Ralph Sandry-Kay at: The Housing Strategy and Development Unit, London Borough of Brent, 34 Wembley Hill Road, Wembley HA9 8AD (tel. 020 8937 2280).

Information supplied by Ralph Sandry-Kay, Belinda Livesey and Robert French