UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi This is my first post. The council has sent me as the landlord a letter (not a notice) saying it's inspected my property under The 2004 Housing Act and using the safely rating system have identified hazards that require my urgent attention, asking me to reply with written intentions of dealing the hazards within 14 days. They did not follow the 239 notice of entry procedures of the 2004 Act and did not inform me as the landlord or give me 24 hrs notice of their visit. Does this make the letter invalid? The hazard identified was not an emergency ie no lack of heating etc or non working sanitary.

I think you need to concentrate on getting the reported  matters put right,rather than start arguing with the council about points of law.You don't mention what the hazards are,and whether these have already been reported to you by the tenant.The letter will still be valid.It is in your interest to get this signed off by the council,as you will not be able to evict (if that is what you want to do) if there is  a suggestion of retaliation on your part.

Hazards that require your urgent attention, although not emergencies... hmm... seems your focus is entirely on the wrong place to me. I know I would feel bad if someone in perceived authority over me checked-up on me and told me what to do... but the question I have is a really simple one... unless you're some kind of slum Landlord, surely you'd want to remedy the things that have been identified, and with haste too?

You're not a slum Landlord, are you?

Just fix the problems. Even if you were not previously aware of the issues, now that you are, you are required to fix it in a timely manner regardless of HHSRS enforcement.

Quote from: karouou on March 21, 2019, 08:38:17 AM
Hi This is my first post. The council has sent me as the landlord a letter (not a notice) saying it's inspected my property under The 2004 Housing Act and using the safely rating system have identified hazards that require my urgent attention, asking me to reply with written intentions of dealing the hazards within 14 days. They did not follow the 239 notice of entry procedures of the 2004 Act and did not inform me as the landlord or give me 24 hrs notice of their visit. Does this make the letter invalid? The hazard identified was not an emergency ie no lack of heating etc or non working sanitary.

You are confusing two separate issues - which is always a little dangerous :-)

Accept the report as constructive feedback and fix the issues mentioned.
Then separately, if you still feel the need, ask the council about entry procedures.

1. If council did not serve s239 notice then yes you are correct, the subsequent inspection/letter/etc are all invalid.
2. You could write to the council and tell them so
3. They will then have to arrange another inspection - find exactly the same issues

What a total waste of everyone’s time!

Meanwhile your tenant (to whom you do have a duty of care) will be living with the hazard “that needs urgent attention”. 

Note1: you not receiving a Notice is does not mean they did not serve the notice.  If they put in a postbox and you didn’t receive it then the notice is still validly served. Did the tenant get his notice?
Note2: there are grounds under 239 under which the council need not serve the notice
Note3: the notice applies to an HHSRS not necessarily for other reasons eg nuisance, complaint by tenant, selective licensing etc

If I am being very generous - perhaps your only issue is not to have a black mark against your name?
In which case fix everything and then tell the council their inspection is invalid and invite them to inspect again....

Hi all thank you for all your replies.  When I said it wasn't an emergency I didn't mean that I'm the sort of landlord that would ever let that happen just that under those circumstances they wouldn't have to serve a 239 notice if there was an emergency.  They found the insulation in the loft to be inefficient at 100mm and say it needs to be 270mm.  It's an older style timber framed property and they didn't believe the EPC that said it had wall insulation and have asked I remove an external cladding board to prove the wall are insulated which they are.  Yes the tenant had asked for further loft insulation but I didn't do it because I didn't realise it was insufficient even though it's rated as an F because I was told the only way to get a higher rating is with a new boiler which will be done by April 2020 because it's an existing tenant.  I will write back and tell them the loft insulation will be increased to 270mm and will expose the wall insulation to prove it's depth.   Im unsure that there's really an extreme cold hazard as it's fully double glazed with gas central heating, a solid fuel aga and they didn't do a formal assessment.  The other issue is the gaps in the timber cladding which could result in a possible pest infestation.  The timber cladding has curled and aged but it's a detached property with cladding on all the exterior and in the HHRS guidelines it says to remove gaps and holes as much as possible.  The tenant did ask me to do this but I though because of the timber ply board behind the cladding was another layer of protection against any entry of pests I didn't do it.  They haven't said they'd take action but have advised that I need to look at filling some of them by a door.  It would be a huge undertaking and possibly require all the boards removed and new ones put up which would not be a reasonable request.  The other issue is the water tank in the loft doesn't have a cover on it which again I didn't realise and will remedy.  The tenants invited them round 2 days after I served a section 21.  They now have an official letter which I hope wont invalidate the section 21.  They are also now wanting compensation for lack of repair for these issues. 

I think S21 should be valid as you got in first.Do what has been asked of you within the time given.I think they are trying it on regarding compensation,what are they claiming for-health problems,big fuel bills? 

Ah, Karouou, it would have been better to have written a longer email first.

Your s21 is valid - but you will need to prove when you served it.  Perhaps a little more critical In this case.
Certainly arguing the s239 is invalid is a good second option and would be good to make that point in your response to the council.

Am surprised they do t believe the EPC I’d have thought that was something the EPC provider should address but if removing one cladding board is not a big undertaking maybe easier.

I’d have to agree, the councils requirements hardly seem urgent (perhaps the lid on the water tank is urgent).

Hi I should've been more detailed to begin with so sorry about that.  I served a section 21 before the visit was done in Oct, then served another one in Jan and when it expired this month informed the tenants I'd be going to court to seek possession they then asked the council to send the letter they had on file since Oct.  The boiler is the only way to get it up to an acceptable rating.  The lid is urgent, yes.  They'll be claiming for all sorts including what you've mentioned and I have been told if they're on benefits which I'm not sure they are but assume so as they don't work, they will get all their legals paid and a top barrister and if I lose on any point I'll have to pay their fees. 

Quote from: karouou on March 22, 2019, 03:08:34 AM
I was told the only way to get a higher rating is with a new boiler which will be done by April 2020 because it's an existing tenant.

I am reading that to mean that the most recent tenancy was granted or deemed granted before 1 April 2018 then?

Quote from: karouou on March 21, 2019, 08:38:17 AM
The council has sent me as the landlord a letter (not a notice)

The s21 is currently valid. However, if the council serve you an improvement or emergency remedial action notice related to the same issue the tenant previously complained to you about, assuming that was in writing, at any point before you obtain an order for possession and the order is executed by bailiffs or HCEOs, the s21 would be render invalid and any possession order set aside.

Yes the tenancy was granted before that date.  Thank you for your reply.