Clause 51 - Temporary exemption from licensing requirement
Housing Bill
2:45 pm
Mr John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings, Conservative)
It is good to back in the throes of our important and interesting work, and it is good to welcome the hon. Member for Teignbridge (Richard Younger-Ross), a new member of the Committee. It has taken some time for the notification of these sittings to reach him. Whether that is because there are other matters of a personal nature that he places higher on his list of priorities than housing and the concerns about the vulnerable which we have been discussing in Committee, is a matter for him, his conscience and his constituents.
At this juncture, it is important to look closely at the implications involved when someone who manages or controls an HMO that is not licensed is in the process of selling that property. The amendment would insert a new subsection in clause 51. We heard earlier that we are talking about a rapidly moving marketplace, about which the Minister was right to use the word ''fragile''. Given our concerns about that fragility, the need to bring new people into the marketplace, and our knowledge that properties move in and out of the sector and the licensing regime, and—in the case of landlords with a number of properties that they rent out—are added to landlords' portfolios and leave them, it is important that we make provision for properties in transition and landlords who are either selling or buying a property and therefore should not be unnecessarily penalised under the Bill. I do not think that the Bill is intended to penalise them, and the Minister is sensitive to such issues and the messages that we broadcast to landlords.
I hope that this is a sensible amendment that would make provision for landlords to have an appropriate exemption in the case of selling or buying a property. I am talking about an existing owner disposing of a property or a new owner obtaining one. I do not think that the Minister will have any difficulty accepting the amendment in the spirit that he has displayed throughout our proceedings.
The other amendment in this group, No. 275, works in conjunction with the lead amendment. It would allow being in the process of selling a property that should have a licence to be a defence for not having a licence for that property. Some people who are buying a property and are not fully familiar with their obligations on licensing may well be caught out. We have said throughout our proceedings that people who are engaged in the process of renting out HMOs should be subject to proper scrutiny. However, if someone does not have a licence and did not know that they should have one, because they have just bought the property, it is reasonable for them to say, ''I wanted sufficient time to acquaint myself with my responsibilities and to go through the process of obtaining a licence.''