HMO Results - 4. Survey Results – Summary Findings

4. Survey Results – Summary Findings

In total 99 responses to the online survey were received (14 from tenants, ten from landlords, 69 from owner-occupiers and six from “others”). This was below what was expected and was disappointing considering the number of letters and e-mails that were issued and the wide advertising of the proposals. It was expected that the majority of respondents would be owner-occupiers within the proposed wards, it was surprising however, that even those landlords and tenants who were fully aware of the proposals and have in the past commented on issues regarding licensing, maintenance and repair of properties, and have previously been quite vocal about mandatory licencing regimes, failed to submit any response or complete the online survey regarding the council’s proposals.

Note that figures are rounded up/down to the nearest whole number where there is a percentage with a fraction of a total and so in some cases the totals may amount to just over or just under 100%. Highest response rates are shown in bold for each question where relevant (excluding “Don’t know” responses).

1. All respondents – Title

Number of respondents in each category:

Mr - 49
Mrs - 27
Ms - 13
Miss - 10
Doctor - 0
Councillor - 0

Other - 0

2. All respondents - What age band do you fall into?

Number of respondents in each age band:

Under 18 - 0
18-24 - 1
25-34 - 6
35-44 - 8
45-54 - 16
55-64 -39
65-74 - 17
75 or over - 12

3. All respondents - Which of the following apply to you in regard to a property you live in within Arun District?

Number of respondents in each tenure/category type:

Tenant in privately rented property - 14
Tenant in social housing property - 0

Landlord - 10
Managing agent/agent - 1
Owner-occupier - 69
Other - 2
None of the above - 3

4. Privately renting tenants - What sort of property do you live in?

Number of privately renting tenants in each property type:

Entire house (only you or you and your family – 2
Shared house (you or you and your family and other people) – 1
Self-contained flat (it has its own cooking and bathroom facilities) – 11
Shared flat (you share bathroom and/or cooking facilities) – 0
Other - 0

5. Privately renting tenants - If you ticked that you live in a shared house or shared flat, how many people live in the property?

Number of other persons privately renting tenants share with, if applicable:

Share with 2 persons - 0
Share with 3 persons - 0
Share with 4 persons - 0
Share with 5 persons - 0
Share with 6 persons - 0
Share with 7 persons - 0
Share with more than 7 persons - 1
Don’t know - 0

It can be deduced therefore that there was only one respondent who was a tenant in a shared property and all of the other tenants in private sector housing must be living in self-contained accommodation, such as a house or flat where they do not share any facilities, either living as a single occupant or as part of a single household.

6. Privately renting tenants - If you ticked that you live in a shared house or shared flat, does the property currently have a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) licence?

Number of privately renting tenants who live in a house with a current HMO licence:

Yes – 0
No – 1
Don’t know – 0

7. Privately renting tenants - Are you a full-time student attending the University of Chichester?

Number of privately renting tenants who attend the University of Chichester:

Yes – Bognor Regis campus – 1
Yes – Chichester campus - 0
No - 13

8. Privately renting tenants - Is the property you rent registered on the Arun and Chichester Landlord Accreditation Scheme?

Number of privately renting tenants who live in a property accredited on the Chichester and Arun Landlord Accreditation Scheme:

Yes - 0
No – 14

9. Privately renting tenants - Do you live or work in one of the wards proposed for the additional HMO licensing designation?

Number of privately renting tenant respondents who work and/or live in the proposed wards:

Yes – I live in River ward - 3
Yes – I work in River ward - 0
Yes – I live in Hotham ward - 0
Yes – I work in Hotham ward - 0
Yes – I live in Marine ward - 7
Yes – I work in Marine ward - 1
No – I don’t live or work in any of the proposed wards - 3

Privately renting tenants were asked the following questions relating to their accommodation:

10. As a tenant renting from a private landlord, have you had problems with any of the following issues? Respondents were able to choose as many as were applicable (and thus the total numbers/percentage may be higher than the 14 privately rented respondents that answered):

Responses from privately renting tenants regarding issues they have encountered in their rented properties:

Damp and disrepair – 4 (28.6%)
Overcrowding – 0 (0%)
Lack of heating – 2 (14.3%)
Lack of basic amenities (bath/shower, kitchen facilities, etc.) – 0 (0%)
Lack of safety measures – 0 (0%)
Dirty and poorly maintained communal stairs and hallways – 2 (14.3%)
Rubbish and waste accumulations – 2 (14.3%)
General lack of management and supervision – 1 (7.1%)
Lack of tenancy paperwork – 0 (0%)
Poor response to requests for repairs – 3 (21.4%)
Harassment and/or illegal eviction including pressure to leave without notice – 0 (0%)
Retaliatory eviction, for example, evicted after complaining of disrepair – 0 (0%)
Other – 3 (21.4%)
None – 4 (28.6%)
Other = Fly-tipping/waste – 2 (14.2%)
Unaffordable rent increases – 1 (7.1%)

11. If a respondent said they had experienced issues they were asked about how they went about resolving the issue(s) and who they contacted.

Of seven responses received to this question, two replied that they contacted the landlord, two stated that they contacted the managing agent and three said that the matter had been left unresolved despite contacting their landlord or agent.

12. They were then asked if this was successful in resolving the matter.

Number of persons responding in regard to success in resolving these matters:

Yes – 7
No – 1
Partially – 4
Not applicable - 1

13. When tenants were asked if the issue(s) they had encountered were at the same property that they still lived in:

Number of persons responding that the issues they encountered were at the same property where they currently live:

Yes – 10
No – 1
Not applicable - 1

The total number of responses here reflects that not all respondents identified that they had encountered any issues in a previous question.

Tenants renting from a Social Housing Provider/Housing Association were asked a number of questions relating to their accommodation; however, no tenants who live in social housing completed the survey.

Landlords were asked the following questions relating to their rented properties. (If landlords wished to answer the survey as an owner-occupier (or other title), they were required to complete a further survey).

14. Landlords were asked what sort of property they rent out in Arun District:

Types of properties rented out by respondent landlords:

Entire house (let to an individual) – 0
Shared house (let to multiple people) – 5
Self-contained flat (it has its own cooking and bathroom facilities) – 5
Shared flat (individuals share cooking and bathroom facilities) – 0
Other - 0

The responses indicate that half of the landlord respondents say they let out a shared house with four or more occupants and therefore could potentially fall into the proposed scheme definition if their rented properties are also within the proposed scheme wards.

15. Landlords who responded that they rented shared houses or flats were then asked how many people live in the property.

Number of persons residing in shared properties rented out by respondent landlords:

2 people - 0
3 people - 0
4 people - 2
5 people - 0
6 people – 1
7 people - 1
More than 7 people – 1

16. Landlords were asked whether the shared house or flat that they rent out currently had a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) licence:

Number of landlords who rent shared properties who were asked whether they had a current HMO licence:

Yes – 3
No – 1
Don’t know - 0

The single response of “no” is in relation to a HMO that has only four occupants, and thus is not required to be mandatorily licensed at this time; however, it would fall within the remit of the proposed additional licensing scheme.

17. As a landlord renting out a property, have you had problems with any of the following issues? Respondents were able to choose as many as were applicable (and thus the number may be higher than the total of 10 landlord respondents):

Number of landlords who responded that they had encountered the following issues:

Damp and disrepair – 1
Overcrowding – 0
Malicious damage caused by tenants – 4
Rubbish and waste accumulations – 3
Antisocial behaviour by tenants – 3
Drug use by tenants – 3
Other – 1
None – 5

As five out of the ten respondents (50%) stated that they had no problems, if the remaining figures are divided between the other five respondents, the percentage totals are double to the figures shown, for example the 1 response for damp and disrepair actually becomes 20 percent of the total responses and malicious damage caused by tenants actually becomes 80 percent of the total responses (again allowing for the fact that respondents could tick as many issues as they liked).

18. Landlords were asked whether they were a member of a national landlord association?

Percentage of all landlord respondents stating they were a member of a national landlord association (Total 10):

Yes – 70%
No – 30%

19. Landlords were asked whether they had heard of the Chichester and Arun Landlord Accreditation Scheme:

Percentage of all landlord respondents who had heard of the Chichester and Arun Landlord Accreditation Scheme (Total 10):

Yes – 80%
No – 20%

20. Landlords were asked whether they were registered on the Chichester and Arun Landlord Accreditation Scheme:

Percentage of all landlord respondents who are registered on the Chichester and Arun Landlord Accreditation Scheme (Total 10):

Yes – 20%
No – 80%

21. Landlords were asked whether they live or work in one of the wards proposed for the additional HMO licensing designation? (Total may be more than 10 as some landlords may work and live in a particular ward).

Number of landlord respondents who work and/or live in the proposed wards:

Yes – I live in River ward - 0
Yes – I work in River ward - 1
Yes – I live in Hotham ward - 2
Yes – I work in Hotham ward - 1
Yes – I live in Marine ward - 0
Yes – I work in Marine ward - 0
No – I don’t live or work in any of the proposed wards - 7

Managing agents/agents were asked the following questions relating to the rented properties the manage or let. (If managing agents wished to answer the survey as a resident, they were required to complete a separate survey).

As only one respondent identified themselves as a managing agent, it has to be assumed that each response where there is a total of more than 1 or there are multiple responses to the same question, means that all apply to that one individual agent, for example in question 31 below, each type of property has a single response and so it has to be deduced that the agent manages one of each type of these properties.

22. What sort of property do you manage in Arun District?

Types of properties managed out by respondent agents:

Entire house (let to an individual) – 1
Shared house (let to multiple people) – 1
Self-contained flat (it has its own cooking and bathroom facilities) – 1
Shared flat (individuals share cooking and bathroom facilities) – 1
Other – 1

Although the figures represent 25% for each category, as it is based on one managing agent respondent, the figure for each sector could also be shown as 100% for each category as the answer to each is a positive one and is unlikely that each type of property is actually represented by an equal 25% share of the agent’s clients’ properties.

23. As a managing agent, have you had problems with any of the following issues? Respondents were able to choose as many as were applicable:

Number of agents who responded that they had encountered the following issues:

Damp and disrepair – 0
Overcrowding – 0
Lack of heating – 0
Lack of basic amenities (bath/shower/cooking facilities) – 0
Lack of safety measures – 0
Dirty and poorly maintained condition – 0
Rubbish and waste accumulations – 0
General lack of management and maintenance – 0
Lack of tenancy paperwork – 0
Poor response to requests for repairs – 0
Harassment and/or illegal eviction – 0
Retaliatory eviction – 0
Malicious damage caused by tenants – 0
Drug use by tenants – 0
Antisocial behaviour by tenants – 0
Antisocial behaviour in the district – 1
Other – 0
None – 0

24. Managing agents were asked whether they work in one of the wards proposed for the additional HMO licensing designation?

Number of agent respondents who work in the proposed wards:

Yes – I work in River ward - 0
Yes – I work in Hotham ward - 1
Yes – I work in Marine ward - 1
No – I don’t work in any of the proposed wards - 0

As only one managing agent identified themselves as such, it can be deduced that the overall figures above can be stated as being 100% work in Hotham and Marine wards and the fifty percent split is entirely due to the way the question is posed.

Residents owning and living in their own property (“owner-occupier”) were asked the following questions relating to their property.

25. Which of the following applies to you in regard to a property within Arun District that you live in?

Number of owner-occupiers living in different types of housing:

Freehold house – 52
Freehold flat – 1
Leasehold flat – 14
Shared ownership house or flat – 1
Other – 1
Not applicable - 0

26. Owner-occupiers were asked whether they live or work in one of the wards proposed for the additional HMO licensing designation?

Number of landlord respondents who work and/or live in the proposed wards:

Yes – I live in River ward - 36
Yes – I work in River ward - 1
Yes – I live in Hotham ward - 10
Yes – I work in Hotham ward - 2
Yes – I live in Marine ward -15
Yes – I work in Marine ward - 2
No – I don’t live or work in any of the proposed wards - 8

All respondents were asked a number of questions regarding the proposed additional HMO licensing scheme. All responses are out of 99 - the total number of respondents to the online survey.

27. Respondents were asked, thinking about the housing within Arun District as a whole, how much of a problem were each of the following on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest:

Overcrowding

1 - Less of an issue 12.2%
2 - 11.2%
3 - 15.3%
4 - 12.2%
5 - More of an issue 22.4%
Don’t know - 26.5%

27% of tenants were concerned about overcrowding being an issue, whereas 20% of landlords didn’t feel this was a problem. 24% of owner-occupiers also considered this to be a high priority issue.

Poor external appearance

1 – Less of an issue 9.2%
2 - 18.4%
3 - 24.5%
4 - 18.4%
5 – More of an issue 25.5%
Don’t know - 4.1%

18% of tenants considered this as being a problem, whereas 20% of landlords considered the same and 30% of owner-occupiers considered this to be a problem.

Untidy gardens/yards

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 18.4%
3 - 28.6%
4 - 20.4%
5 – More of an issue 21.4%
Don’t know - 4.1%

50% of landlords considered that this was only a “moderate” issue, whereas a quarter of owner-occupiers and a third of tenants considered that this was a problem.

Property disrepair

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 23.5%
3 - 23.5%
4 - 19.4%
5 - More of an issue 22.4%
Don’t know - 4.1%

Interestingly more tenants considered this to be a lesser problem, along with landlords, whereas owner-occupiers considered it to be more important.

Flytipping

1 – Less of an issue 9.2%
2 - 14.3%
3 - 18.4%
4 - 22.4%
5 – More of an issue 27.6%
Don’t know - 8.2%

Landlords, owner-occupiers and “other respondents” were in general more concerned about flytipping than tenants and considered it to be a problem.

Refuse disposal

1 – Less of an issue 14.3%
2 - 17.3%
3 - 19.4%
4 - 25.5%
5 – More of an issue 19.4%
Don’t know - 4.1%

36% of tenants considered this to be a problem, whereas 30% of landlords considered it wasn’t and a similar number (29%) of owner-occupiers also considered it to be a problem.

Drugs

1 – Less of an issue 5.1%
2 - 11.2%
3 - 16.3%
4 - 14.3%
5 – More of an issue 38.8%
Don’t know - 14.3%

18.2% of tenants both considered this to be a problem and not a problem, presumably reflecting issue faced by tenants in different properties and areas where they may have experienced such issues. 20% of landlords considered that this was a problem and 45% of owner-occupiers considered this to be a large problem.

Antisocial behaviour

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 15.3%
3 - 18.4%
4 - 20.4%
5 – More of an issue 31.6%
Don’t know - 7.1%

27.3% of tenants and 36% of owner-occupiers considered this to be a large problem and 40% of landlords considered it to be a problem.

28. Respondents were then asked, thinking about the housing within the proposed additional HMO licensing scheme wards, how much of a problem were each of the following on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest:

River ward, Littlehampton

All respondents (99)

Overcrowding

1 – Less of an issue 5.1%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 8.2%
4 - 13.3%
5 – More of an issue 12.2%
Don’t know - 52%

14.2% of tenants considered this to be less of an issue, 16% of owner-occupiers considered it to be a problem and 10% of landlords responded in each of the 1-4 bands (i.e. from less of a problem through to more of a problem).

Poor external appearance

1 – Less of an issue 6.1%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 23.5%
4 - 13.3%
5 – More of an issue 12.2%
Don’t know - 35.7%

The majority of tenants (21.4%) did not consider this to be a problem, 40% of landlords considered it a moderate problem as did 18.8% of owner-occupiers, with a slightly smaller percentage (18.8%) considering it to be a problem.

Untidy gardens/yards

1 – Less of an issue 5.1%
2 - 14.3%
3 - 17.3%
4 - 15.3%
5 – More of an issue 13.3%
Don’t know - 34.7%

28.5% of tenants considered that this wasn’t a major issue, whereas 20% of landlords considered it was a moderate issue or issue. 39% of owner-occupiers considered this to be an issue.

Property disrepair

1 – Less of an issue 5.1%
2 - 12.2%
3 - 16.3%
4 - 14.3%
5 – More of an issue 13.3%
Don’t know - 38.8%

14.2% of tenants considered this to be a problem, whereas only 10% of landlords did and over 30% of owner-occupiers considered this to be a problem.

Flytipping

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 11.2%
3 - 8.2%
4 - 14.3%
5 – More of an issue 17.3%
Don’t know - 41.8%

Most tenants did not consider this to be an issue, 30% of landlords considered this a large problem and over 35% of owner-occupiers considered that this was a problem.

Refuse disposal

1 – Less of an issue 6.1%
2 - 13.3%
3 - 11.2%
4 - 17.3%
5 – More of an issue 13.3%
Don’t know - 38.8%

Only 7% of tenants thought that this was a problem, 40% of landlords considered it is a problem and two-thirds of owner-occupiers considered that this is a problem.

Drugs

1 – Less of an issue 5.1%
2 - 7.2%
3 - 7.1%
4 - 12.2%
5 - More of an issue - 27.6%
Don’t know - 40.8%

14.2% of tenants consider this to be a problem, 20% of landlords both considered it was a problem and not a problem and 31.8% of owner-occupiers considered this was a large problem.

Antisocial behaviour

1 – Less of an issue 6.1%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 7.1%
4 - 13.3%
5 – More of an issue 25.5%
Don’t know - 38.8%

21.3% of considered that anti-social behaviour was a large problem whereas only 10% of landlords did. 30.4% of owner-occupiers considered that this was a large problem.

Hotham ward, Bognor Regis

All respondents (99)

Overcrowding

1 – Less of an issue 9.2%
2 - 5.1%
3 - 5.1%
4 - 3.1%
5 – More of an issue 8.2%
Don’t know - 69.4%

7% of tenants considered this was a problem as did 10% of landlords and owner-occupiers.

Poor external appearance

1 – Less of an issue 8.2%
2 - 7.1%
3 - 8.2%
4 - 6.1%
5 – More of an issue 7.1%
Don’t know - 63.3%

14.3% of tenants thought this was less of a problem as did 10% of landlord and 8.7% of owner-occupiers.

Untidy gardens/yards

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 9.2%
4 - 5.1%
5 – More of an issue 6.1%
Don’t know - 63.3%

Few tenants considered that this was an issue and the majority of landlords didn’t think this was much of a problem. 14.4% of owner-occupiers considered this to be a problem.

Property disrepair

1 – Less of an issue 8.2%
2 - 7.1%
3 - 7.1%
4 - 6.1%
5 – More of an issue 8.2%
Don’t know - 63.3%

14.3% of tenants did not think there was much of a problem in this respect, most landlords agreed with that but 10.1% of owner-occupiers considered that this was a problem.

Flytipping

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 6.1%
3 - 10.2%
4 - 5.1%
5 – More of an issue 5.1%
Don’t know - 66.3%

21% of tenants considered this was less of an issue ad did 30% of landlords but 15% of owner-occupiers considered it was a problem.

Refuse disposal

1 – Less of an issue 8.2%
2 - 10.2%
3 - 8.2%
4 - 4.1%
5 – More of an issue 6.1%
Don’t know - 63.3%

Most tenants didn’t feel this was an issue, 10% of landlords responded for each of the scoring bands 1-4, and 13% of owner-occupiers considered it was a problem.

Drugs

1 – Less of an issue 6.1%
2 - 5.1%
3 - 8.2%
4 - 5.1%
5 – More of an issue 9.2%
Don’t know - 66.3%

21% of tenants considered that this was a moderate or higher level problem, 10% of landlords responded for each of the scoring bands 1-4 and 13% of owner-occupiers considered this was a problem.

Antisocial behaviour

1 – Less of an issue 6.1%
2 - 5.1%
3 - 11.2%
4 - 5.1%
5 – More of an issue 9.2%
Don’t know - 63.3%

14.3% of tenants considered this was a problem as did 10% of landlords and 11.6% of owner-occupiers considered this was a greater problem.

Marine ward, Bognor Regis

All respondents (99)

Overcrowding

1 – Less of an issue 9.2%
2 - 5.1%
3 - 10.2%
4 - 6.1%
>5 – More of an issue 12.2%
Don’t know - 57.1%

14.3% of tenants agreed this was a problem, 10% of landlords agreed, and 15.9% of owner-occupiers considered that this was a problem.

Poor external appearance

1 – Less of an issue 8.2%
2 - 11.2%
3 - 11.2%
4 - 8.2%
5 – More of a problem 12.2%
Don’t know - 49%

14% of tenants considered that this was a problem and 10% of landlords considered this was a problem in the scoring bands 1-4; whilst 23% of owner-occupiers considered this was a higher level problem.

Untidy gardens/yards

1 – Less of an issue 10.2%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 14.3%
4 - 6.1%
5 – More of an issue 11.2%
Don’t know - 49%

28.6% of tenants didn’t think this was much of a problem, 10% of considered the same, although 20% considered this as a moderate problem, but 14.5% of owner-occupiers considered this a large problem.

Property disrepair

1 – Less of an issue 9.2%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 11.2%
4 - 8.2%
5 – More of an issue - 13.3%
Don’t know - 49%

14.3% of tenants considered this was a problem, whereas 10% of landlords felt it was less of a problem and 16% of considered this a larger problem.

Flytipping

1 – Less of an issue 12.2%
2 - 7.1%
3 - 9.2%
4 - 6.1%
5 – More of an issue 13.3%
Don’t know - 52%

14.3% of tenants considered this was a large problem, landlords were split evenly over scoring bands 1-4 on the level of problems regarding flytipping and 16% of owner-occupiers considered this to be a larger problem.

Refuse disposal

1 – Less of an issue 11.2%
2 - 11.2%
3 - 11.2%
4 - 7.1%
5 – More of an issue 8.2%
Don’t know - 51%

21% of tenants considered this to be a problem, landlords were again split evenly over scoring bands 1-4 on the level of problems regarding refuse and 17.2% of owner-occupiers considered this was more of a problem.

Drugs

1 – Less of an issue 7.1%
2 - 8.2%
3 - 9.2%
4 - 9.2%
5 – More of an issue 13.3%
Don’t know - 53.1%

More than a third of tenants considered that there were problems regarding drugs as did 20% of landlords and more than 24% of owner-occupiers.

Antisocial behaviour

1 – Less of an issue 10.2%
2 - 9.2%
3 - 9.2%
4 - 11.2%
5 – More of an issue 11.2%
Don’t know - 49%

Almost a third of tenants considered antisocial behaviour as a problem, as did a similar number of landlords and almost a quarter of owner-occupiers.

29. Respondents were asked, based on their experience or opinion, whether they thought that private landlords within the district maintain their properties to a good standard?

% of all respondents (Total 99 respondents)

Yes: Overall 23.5%
(Tenants – 28.8%; Landlords – 80%; Owner-occupiers – 11.6%; Other – 50%)

No: Overall 55%
(Tenants – 35.7%; Landlord – 10%; Owner-occupiers – 65.2%; Other – 50%)

Don’t know: Overall 21.4%
(Tenants – 35.7%; Landlords – 10%; Owner-occupiers – 23.2%; Other – 0%)

30. Respondents were asked whether they thought that properties within River ward, Littlehampton and Hotham and Marine wards in Bognor Regis are better or more poorly maintained than those within the district as a whole?

% of all respondents (Total 99 respondents

Better maintained: Overall 9.2%
(Tenants - 7.1%; Landlords - 20%); Owner-occupiers – 5.8%; Other – 16.6%)

More poorly maintained: Overall 29.6%
(Tenants - 28.5%; Landlords – 0%; Owner-occupiers – 43.4%; Other – 50%)

Don’t know: Overall 61.2%
(Tenants - 64.2%; Landlords - 80%; Owner-occupiers - 50.7%; Other – 33.3%)

30[sic]. Respondents were asked whether they thought that private landlords act responsibly in letting, managing and maintaining their properties within the district?

% of all respondents (Total 99 respondents)

Yes: Overall 23.5%
(Tenants – 21.4%; Landlords – 80%; Owner-occupiers – 13%; Other – 50%)

No: Overall 50%
(Tenants – 14.2%; Landlords - 10%; Owner-occupiers – 64%; Other – 33.3%)

Don’t know: Overall 26.5%
(Tenants – 64%; Landlords - 10%; Owner-occupiers – 23%; Other – 16.6%)

31. Respondents were asked whether they thought that landlords of properties within River ward, Littlehampton and Hotham and Marine wards in Bognor Regis are better or worse at managing and maintaining their properties than those within the district as a whole?

% of all respondents (Total 99 respondents)

Better: Overall 9.2%
(Tenants – 7.1%; Landlords – 20%; Owner-occupiers – 5.8%; Others – 16.6%)

Worse: Overall 29.6%
(Tenants – 28.5%; Landlords – 0%; Owner-occupiers – 43.4%; Others – 50%)

Don’t know: Overall 61.2%
(Tenants – 64.2%; Landlords – 80%; Owner-occupiers – 50.7%; Others – 33.3%)

32. Respondents were asked to what extent they agreed that the proposed licence scheme locations are appropriate. Maps of the proposed scheme wards can be found in Appendix 2.

All respondents (99)

River ward

Strongly agree 31.6%
Agree 12.2%
Neither agree nor disagree 8.2%
Disagree 6.1%
Strongly disagree 25.5%
Don’t know 16.3%

21.3% of tenants that responded strongly disagreed, as did 40% of landlords; however, 40% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed with the proposal for River ward. %0% of “others” strongly disagreed. Ignoring the “neither agree nor disagree” and “don’t know” responses, overall, 43.8% of respondents agreed and 31.6% disagreed that River ward was an appropriate location for additional licensing.

Hotham ward

Strongly agree 23.5%
Agree 11.2%
Neither agree nor disagree 9.2%
Disagree 4.1%
Strongly disagree 14.3%
Don’t know 37.8%

14.2% of tenants that responded either strongly agreed or strongly disagreed, as did 20% of landlords for the same answers; however, 29% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed with the proposal for Hotham ward. 16.6% of “others” either disagreed or strongly disagreed. Ignoring the “neither agree nor disagree” and “don’t know” responses, overall, 34.7% of respondents agreed and only 18.4% disagreed that Hotham ward was an appropriate location for additional licensing.

Marine ward

Strongly agree 26.5%
Agree 12.2%
Neither agree nor disagree 11.2%
Disagree 4.1%
Strongly disagree 17.3%
Don’t know 28.6%

14.2% of tenants that responded agreed, and 20% of landlords strongly agreed. 33.3% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed with the proposal for Marine ward. 16.6% of “others” either disagreed or strongly disagreed. Ignoring the “neither agree nor disagree” and “don’t know” responses, overall, 38.7% of respondents agreed and only 21.4% disagreed that Marine ward was an appropriate location for additional licensing.

Properties that are proposed to be included in Arun’s additional HMO licensing scheme

30[sic]. Respondents were asked whether they thought that the properties/parts of properties proposed should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme. The types of properties proposed to be included in the scheme can be found in Appendix 3.

House with 3 or 4 occupants in 2 or more households sharing facilities

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 41.8%
Agree 18.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 7.1%
Disagree 6.1%
Strongly disagree 21.4%
Don’t know 5.1%

21% of tenants strongly agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme, as did 40% of landlords and 49% of owner-occupiers. 50% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed.

Purpose-built rented flats with 3 or 4 occupants in 2 or more households sharing facilities

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 34.7%
Agree 24.5%
Neither agree nor disagree 8.2%
Disagree 5.1%
Strongly disagree 22.4%
Don’t know 5.1%

21% of tenants strongly agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme, as did 70% of landlords who either agreed or strongly agreed, and 40% of owner-occupiers also strongly agreed. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed.

Building converted into flats with 3 or 4 occupants in 2 or more households in each flat sharing facilities

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 43.9%
Agree 18.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 8.2%
Disagree 5.1%
Strongly disagree 19.4%
Don’t know 5.1%

28.5% of tenants strongly agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme, as did 80% of landlords who either agreed or strongly agreed, and 51% of owner-occupiers also strongly agreed. 50% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed.

Tenanted single household section 257 self-contained flat

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 22.4%
Agree 18.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 15.3%
Disagree 8.2%
Strongly disagree 24.5%
Don’t know 11.2%

28.5% of tenants agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme; however, 70% of landlords strongly disagreed and only 30% either strongly agreed or agreed, and 29% of owner-occupiers also strongly agreed, with 16% strongly disagreeing. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed, although 33.3% agreed.

Owner-occupied section 257 self-contained flat

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 14.3%
Agree 17.3%
Neither agree nor disagree 18.4%
Disagree 9.2%
Strongly disagree 28.6%
Don’t know 12.2%

28.5% of tenants agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme; however, 70% of landlords strongly disagreed and only 10% strongly agreed and 10% agreed. 35% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 20% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed, although 16.6% agreed.

Common parts of buildings converted into section 257 flats

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 28.6%
Agree 17.3%
Neither agree nor disagree 14.3%
Disagree 5.1%
Strongly disagree 23.5%
Don’t know 11.2%

36% of tenants strongly agreed or agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme; however, 60% of landlords strongly disagreed and 10% strongly agreed and 20% agreed. 52% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 21% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed, with only 16.6% agreeing.

Buildings converted into section 257 flats where there are no communal parts

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 26.5%
Agree 11.2%
Neither agree nor disagree 18.4%
Disagree 6.1%
Strongly disagree 26.5%
Don’t know 11.2%

36% of tenants strongly agreed or agreed that this type of property should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme; however, 60% of landlords strongly disagreed and 20% strongly agreed and 10% agreed. 40.5% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 29% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed, with only 16.6% agreeing

31. Respondents were asked to what extent overall did they agree that the property types in the proposed scheme are appropriate. The types of properties proposed to be included in the scheme can be found in Appendix 3.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 23.5%
Agree24.5%
Neither agree nor disagree 9.2%
Disagree 8.2%
Strongly disagree 27.6%
Don’t know 7.1%

36% of tenants strongly agreed or agreed overall that the property types proposed should be included in any additional HMO licensing scheme; however, 60% of landlords strongly disagreed and 20% disagreed whereas only 10% strongly agreed and 10% agreed. 61% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 23% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed, with 33.3% disagreeing.

32. Respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with the council’s HMO Standards (note that these are largely already in place and already applicable to all current HMO properties). The council’s HMO Standards can be found at https://www.arun.gov.uk/hmo/

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 13.3%
Agree 22.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 19.4%
Disagree 16.3%
Strongly disagree 12.2%
Don’t know 17.3%

21% of tenants strongly agreed or agreed with the council’s HMO Standards and 50% of landlords strongly agreed or agreed with 30% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 36% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 30% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 33.3% of “other” respondents strongly agreed, but also with 33.3% strongly disagreeing.

33. Respondents were asked to what extent did they agree with the proposed scheme licence conditions (note that these are already in place and applicable to current mandatory licensable HMO properties)? The council’s HMO licence conditions can be found in Appendix 4.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 24.5%
Agree 19.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 15.3%
Disagree 7.1%
Strongly disagree 20.4%
Don’t know 13.3%

36% of tenants strongly agreed or agreed with the council’s HMO licence Conditions with only 7% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 60% of landlords strongly agreed or agreed with 30% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 46% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 26% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 66.6% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed, with 16.6% also disagreeing

34. Respondents were asked to what extent did they agree with the proposed licence scheme fees? The proposed scheme fees can be found in Appendix 5.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 10.2%
Agree 10.2%
Neither agree nor disagree 22.4%
Disagree 5.1%
Strongly disagree 33.7%
Don’t know 18.4%

Just 7% of tenants strongly agreed or agreed with the council’s proposed additional HMO licence fees with 36% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. This was no doubt as a reflection that tenants believed that costs would be passed on to them in the form of rent increases. Unsurprisingly, 70% of landlords disagreed or strongly disagreed, although 30% neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposed fees. 27.5% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed, with 35% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. 50% of “other” respondents strongly disagreed.

35. Respondents were asked whether they thought that applicants for a HMO licence, whether mandatory or as part of an additional licensing scheme, should be required to provide a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 43.9%
Agree 20.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 15.3%
Disagree 4.1%
Strongly disagree 11.2%
Don’t know 5.1%

43% of tenants either strongly agreed or agreed that landlords should be required to provide a DBS check and only 40% of landlords strongly agreed or agreed, whereas 69.5% of owner-occupiers strongly agreed or agreed. 83% of “other” respondents strongly agreed or agreed. Only 7% of tenants, 13% of owner-occupiers and 16.6% of “other” stated that they disagreed or strongly disagreed. 40% of landlords, the same number that strongly agreed or agreed strongly disagreed with the need to provide a DBS check.

36. Respondents were asked whether they thought that any additional licensing scheme should include other areas within Arun District in addition to River, Hotham and Marine wards.

Yes 33.7%
No 23.5%
Don’t know 42.7%

28.5% of tenants said that they thought additional HMO licensing should also be introduced in other wards within the district, but half that number said that they didn’t think it should be introduced elsewhere. 20% of landlords stated that it should by introduced elsewhere, whereas 50% said it shouldn’t. 38% of owner-occupiers said that they thought additional HMO licensing should also be introduced in other wards within the district but just 16% said that they didn’t think it should be introduced elsewhere. One-third of “others” thought that it should be introduced in other wards as well, but two-thirds said that it shouldn’t.

In general responses to which other areas should be included did not specify particular wards, but instead indicated that all parts of the district should be treated the same.

37. Respondents were asked whether they thought that all HMOs should be required to be managed by a professional manager or agent.

Yes 52%
No 32.7%
Don’t know 15.3%

21.5% of tenants agreed that HMOs should be managed by a professional manager or agent with a similar number (20%) of landlords agreeing; however, 60% of owner-occupiers and 83% of “others” agreed. 28.5% of tenants, 70% of landlords, 11.5% of owner-occupiers and 17% of “others” said “no” to the question.

38. Respondents were asked whether they considered that shorter licences (i.e. less than the five year norm) should be issued for those properties that are found to be sub- standard or fail to meet minimum standards during the licensing process. (Action will then be required by the landlord to bring them up to standard.)

Yes 78.6%
No 12.2%
Don’t know 9.2%

57% of tenants agreed with a similar number, 60%, of landlords agreeing. A very large proportion of owner-occupiers (82%) agreed on issuing shorter licences and 100% of “others” agreed.

39. Respondents were asked whether they agreed that landlords should effectively and adequately manage their rented properties.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 75.5%
Agree 16.3%
Neither agree nor disagree 4.1%
Disagree 0%
Strongly disagree 1%
Don’t know2%

79% of tenants, 80% of landlords, 97% of owner-occupiers and 83% of “others” strongly agreed or agreed that they considered it was important that landlords effectively manage their rented properties. Pleasingly apart from one “other” respondent who surprisingly stated that they strongly disagreed!

40. Respondents were asked whether they agreed that landlords should receive training where they fail to meet required standards, let out sub-standard properties or fail to undertake proper management or maintenance (as well as being required to undertake any remedial actions).

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 48%
Agree 26.5%
Neither agree nor disagree 13.3%
Disagree 2%
Strongly disagree 7.1%
Don’t know3.1%

71% of tenants, 80% of landlords, 72% of owner-occupiers and 83% of “others” stated that they strongly agreed or agreed with training for those landlords that let substandard properties. Only 20% of landlords disagreed or strongly disagreed, 9% of owner-occupiers disagreed or strongly disagreed and 16% of “others” strongly disagreed. No tenants disagreed or strongly disagreed.

41. Respondents were asked which matters relating to HMOs (including self-contained section 257 flats) they considered as the most important matters for inclusion in any additional licensing scheme to help improve the housing, on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest.

All respondents (99)

1 = least important; 5 = most important

Over-crowding

1 Least important – 10.2%
2 – 7.1%
3 – 8.2%
4 – 13.3%
5 Most important – 61.2%

Poor external appearance

1 Least important – 8.2%
2 – 12.2%
3 – 21.4%
4 – 15.3%
5 Most important – 42.9%

Untidy gardens/ yards

1 Least important – 17.1%
2 – 10.2%
3 – 23.5%
4 – 16.3%
5 Most important – 42.9%

Property disrepair

1 Least important – 7.1%
2 – 6.1%
3 – 12.2%
4 – 14.3%
5 Most important – 60.2%

Appropriate facilities

1 Least important – 9.2%
2 – 7.1%
3 – 11.2%
4 – 18.4%
5 Most important – 54.1%

Fire safety

1 Least important – 11.2%
2 – 2%
3 – 11.2%
4 – 7.1%
5 Most important – 68.4%

Adequate and appropriate heating

1 Least important – 8.2%
2 – 10.2%
3 – 13.3%
4 – 16.3%
5 Most important – 52%

Have a minimum "E" rated EPC

1 Least important – 11.2%
2 – 13.3%
3 – 24.5%
4 – 19.4%
5 Most important – 31.6%

Security of the property

1 Least important – 8.2%
2 – 8.2%
3 – 27.6%
4 – 20.4%
5 Most important – 35.7%

Property management

1 Least important – 9.2%
2 – 8.2%
3 – 11.2%
4 – 22.4%
5 Most important – 49%

Requirement for landlords and agents to have a DBS check

1 Least important – 19.4%
2 – 8.2%
3 – 9.2%
4 – 18.4%
5 Most important – 44.9%

Compulsory training for landlords

1 Least important – 19.4%
2 – 14.3%
3 – 19.4%
4 – 12.2%
5 Most important – 34.7%

Antisocial behaviour

1 Least important – 10.2%
2 – 4.1%
3 – 12.2%
4 – 15.3%
5 Most important – 58.2%

In all cases, tenants, landlords, owner-occupiers and “others” all considered that these were important matters with the highest proportion of answers for all questions being in the 3, 4 or 5 scoring and with the majority being in the 4 and 5 scoring band. The only deviation from this was with regards to requiring landlords to have a DBS check and compulsory training for landlords. For these two points all respondent categories scored them in the 3, 4 or 5 bands, apart from landlords 60% of whom disagreed with having to have a DBS check and 50% disagreed with compulsory training for landlords. This isn’t perhaps completely unsurprising.

42. Respondents were asked to rate what they think about the following statements. Additional licensing will help to:

All respondents (99)

1 = strongly agree; 2 = agree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree; 4 – disagree; 4 = strongly agree

Help tackle fire safety issues

1 – 36.4%
2 – 26.3%
3 – 11.1%
4 – 8.1%
5 – 10.1%
Don’t know – 8.1%

Help tackle disrepair issues

1 – 39.4%
2 – 23.2%
3 – 12.1%
4 – 7.1%
5 – 11.1%
Don’t know – 7.1%

Improve the internal condition of smaller HMO properties

1 – 34.3%
2 – 26.3%
3 – 13.1%
4 – 6.1%
5 – 12.1%
Don’t know – 8.1%

Improve the health and wellbeing of people living in HMOs

1 – 34.3%
2 – 26.3%
3 – 13.1%
4 – 6.1%
5 – 12.1%
Don’t know – 8.1%

Support good landlords

1 – 36.4%
2 – 21.2%
3 – 12.1%
4 – 5.1%
5 – 16.2%
Don't know – 9.1%

Identify poorer performing landlords

1 – 41.4%
2 – 22.2%
3 – 11.1%
4 – 8.1%
5 – 11.1%
Don’t know – 6.1%

Help reduce antisocial behaviour

1 – 37.4%
2 – 11.1%
3 – 18.2%
4 – 7.1%
5 – 15.2%
Don’t know – 11.1%

Improve property management

1 – 35.4%
2 – 21.2%
3 – 14.1%
4 – 7.1%
5 – 13.1%
Don’t know – 9.1%

In all cases, the majority of tenants and owner-occupiers all agreed or strongly agreed with the statements and the individual respondent categories reflected the overall percentages for all 99 respondents. For landlords it was a slightly more mixed bag, with for example, 30% strongly agreeing that additional licensing would help tackle fire safety issues, but also 30% stating that they strongly disagreed with the statement. Similarly, 30% of landlords stated that they strongly disagreed that the scheme would tackle disrepair and 30% stated that they strongly agreed or agreed with the statement. 40% of landlords did state that it would help to tackle the internal conditions of smaller HMOs, as did 43% of tenants and 34.5% of owner-occupiers. 30% of landlords and 36% of tenants (and 74% of owner-occupiers) strongly agreed or agreed that the proposed scheme would help identify poorer performing landlords.

43. Respondents were asked whether they thought that there is already sufficient management of smaller HMO properties without an additional licensing scheme.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 13.1%
Agree 6.1%
Neither agree nor disagree 18.2%
Disagree 15.2%
Strongly disagree 31.3%
Don’t know 16.2%

Just 14% of tenants but 60% of landlords stated that they agreed or strongly agreed that there was sufficient management of smaller HMOs already, along with just 13% of owner-occupiers. 33.3% of others also agreed or strongly agreed. 14% of tenants, 10% of landlords, 58% of owner-occupiers and 50% of “others” stated that they disagreed or strongly disagreed that there was already sufficient management of smaller HMOs.

44. Respondents were asked to what extent overall did they agree with the proposed additional HMO licensing scheme.

All respondents (99)

Strongly agree 36.4%
Agree 17.2%
Neither agree nor disagree 11.1%
Disagree 3%
Strongly disagree 29.3%
Don’t know 3%

36% of tenants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall proposed scheme, as well as 30% of landlords, 64% of owner-occupiers and 16.6% of “others”; whereas 28.5% of tenants, 60% of landlords, 25% of owner-occupiers and 66.6% of “others” disagreed or strongly disagreed with the overall proposed scheme.