A crackdown on holiday lets such as Airbnbs could be on the cards if Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet backs tougher measures.
Ideas include making better use of the planning system and exploring options to license and register short-term lets, often just known as Airbnbs after one of the leading online letting businesses.
The topic is expected to be on the agenda when the cabinet meets next month after a report by the council’s Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
The cabinet could also lobby the government to bring in the necessary legal changes to make it easier to regulate the booming sector. Government departments are working on the issue.
The growth in the number of properties being used as Airbnbs has led to fewer homes being available to rent, exacerbating the housing shortage.
It is believed to have helped to fuel higher rents and push up the sale price of flats and houses in Brighton and Hove and elsewhere.
The boom in holiday lets has also placed more strain on the council’s rubbish and recycling services, according to a report.
And with no licensing and no register, it is suspected that small letting businesses are getting away with not paying business rates, prompting calls for any tax loopholes to be closed.
An estimated 2,000 to 6,000 homes were being used as short-term and holiday lets in Brighton and Hove, according to a report to the scrutiny committee in March.
Green councillor Ollie Sykes said that short-term lets affected housing availability in Brighton and Hove, adding that 2,100 homes in the area were for rent on the website Rightmove.
Councillor Sykes said: “Basically, there is nowhere to rent in Brighton and Hove any more. It’s all Airbnb which is absolutely crazy.
“I’m all for compliant regulated short-term lets as provided by Catherine Lane but also clear that should be controlled by planning due to the impact on housing.”
Catherine Lane runs My Holiday Lets and told the scrutiny committee that houses were let in Kemp Town and Brunswick Square which were registered as “main residences” – and as a result, the owners did not pay business rates.
Almost 450 operators were registered to pay business rates. And those registered as businesses had to pay for commercial waste collections unlike those whose properties were regarded as residential.
The scrutiny committee set up a task and finish group which prepared the report and proposed measures to be considered by the cabinet next month.
The report said that short-term lets tended to produce more rubbish and recycling than regular homes, with visitors putting their waste out on the wrong days.
The scrutiny committee discussed steps taken by other councils, including in Blackpool where a holiday lets zone had been established in the strategic plan for the area.
The cabinet could propose creating a zone or zones where Airbnbs are permitted and where they are not usually to be allowed as work gets under way on the new City Plan for Brighton and Hove.
This could operate in a similar way to the hotels zoning that currently exists, encouraging hotels on the seafront and in central areas while discouraging them in other places.
The cabinet is due to meet at Hove Town Hall at 2pm on Thursday 26 June. The meeting is scheduled to be webcast.
Another cash grab disguised as a licensing scheme.
Exactly that.
Labour are the absolute worst, in opposition and in power. The significant population growth in the UK has led to a housing shortage and increased demand, particularly as hotels are used to accommodate the new arrivals. Young people struggle to afford homes because skilled work visas suppress wages at levels needed for mortgages. Labour point fingers, hold secretive meetings and lie.
It’s the result of decades of underbuilding, unregulated second home use, and policies that treat housing as an asset first, not a basic need. Cynical generalisation and politically charged blame aside, let me ask a question. Why should STLs get a free pass just because they’re operating behind a digital platform?
“politically charged blame”, you mean reasoned, evidence-based criticism directed at the Labour Party (sometimes called the “Liebour Party” for their constant never ending lies). Labour’s policies push for development on the south downs, parks, green verges, squares, concreting over the sky, encroaching on open space and taking our homes into their possession bit by bit and our earnings even when on low wages.
I thought we were talking about holiday lets, not second homes, besides holiday let owners don’t get a “free pass” people need to pay tax on them. Labour locally doubled council tax on them, £300 a month now on a one bed flat. This isn’t means tested on the guest or the owner, perhaps it is the owner’s sole pension. Why should renters get a free pass? They pay less in tax than those in holiday homes, some of whom will be using it as emergency accommodation, waiting for house sales to go through, if a boiler has broken, visiting sick relatives etc but they now need to pay more in tax while the number of hotel rooms available to the public reduces. None of this is in any way means tested.
Rob, you’ve shifted from STLs to generalised attacks on Labour, green space, taxation, and second homes, which only reinforces my point about politically charged blame being a distraction.
Back to the topic: a full-time holiday let is a business. That’s true whether the guest is a tourist, a visiting sick relative, or a temporary worker. And like any business, it should pay business rates, ensure fire safety, manage waste properly, and be clearly identifiable to regulators and neighbours. None of this prevents people from operating short-term lets, it just asks them to do so on the same terms as any other hotel or holiday home.
If we’re serious about housing, we need balanced policies, not scapegoating, not slogans.
Another cash grab indeed. Plus they have no jurisdiction over Air BnBs.
Not quite right, Chris. Councils do have jurisdiction over the properties listed on Airbnb – it’s the operators they regulate, not the platform itself.
A measured response to an alarming situation. Unregulated, unlicensed premises let out on the quiet, often with no safety concerns or consideration for renters or neighbours. All this whilst we are experiencing a housing crisis and strains on Council services. I suspect that no business rates or income tax is paid. About time this scamming of the community was addressed.
The council has a very poor reputation when it comes to licensing and regulation. They have tried to bring in schemes whereby landlords are forced to sign up to a license when the council already have the powers of enforcement through the Housing Act. The primary difference is that their proposed scheme will give them powers to extort funds from the licensees. All of this whilst they have been lambasted as being the largest landlord in the city who have failed to comply with the most basic regulations in respect of fire precautions, gas and electrical safety in their own properties. This is unquestionably about political virtue signalling and thinly veiled taxation than a genuine concern for tenants and housing availability.
You both highlight precisely why a proper licensing scheme matters. It shouldn’t be about political point-scoring or extracting money. It should be about creating a level playing field, where all providers, whether it’s an STL, HMO landlord, or the council itself, meet the same minimum standards on fire safety, waste, insurance, and taxation.
But the local authority already have powers in respect of these standards under the housing act. A licensing scheme is not required for them to intervene where minimum standards are not met. Furthermore, issues of waste and taxation would not apply to councils, only to the landlords and tenants. (The latter indirectly in some circumstances where the former will increase rents to cover greater costs).
My main point is; how can it be acceptable, (or desireable), to allow an organisation to police the standards of other landlords via a licensing scheme (with significant charges involved), when they cannot maintain their own properties to minimum legal standards?
Credit where it’s due, Atticus, it’s an excellent question. I agree that council-owned housing should absolutely be held to the same legal standards. No one should be above the rules.
LA’s existing powers under the Housing Act are reactive, not proactive. They rely on complaints, inspections, or serious incidents to trigger enforcement. A licensing scheme flips that by sets expectations upfront, requiring STLs to prove compliance in advance, and gives councils a mechanism to fund enforcement sustainably.
The TFG report makes for an interesting read, stating that many STLs operate as unregistered businesses using residential services, avoiding commercial waste costs and business rates. We’ve got a strong metric to refer to: Brighton had 2,000–6,000 STLs, yet only 443 paid business rates. That’s a clear imbalance, I’m sure you can agree.
Licensing isn’t a silver bullet by any means, but it is a practical tool to make sure everyone meets the same baseline obligations. And if BHCC fall short on their own stock, residents should absolutely hold them to account too, I completely agree.
Have you set foot in the city, ever visited half the shops on London Road? Many operate as cash-only businesses, which likely enables them to evade income and business taxes while potentially laundering money tied to the drug trade that damages our city and kills young people. Why not focus enforcement efforts on these clearly illegal business practices? Some education, letting just a room on Airbnb requires providing a National Insurance number and tax details, making it far more regulated than the typical barbershop suspected of money laundering.
None of this will be means assessed and if this is someone’s pension then goodbye pension.
Labour are the problem once again in power and in opposition.
The reasons why they are no rental properties is due to the rental reform bill and due to the ever more onerous legislation and tax changes around owning a rental property. There are now huge numbers of former rental properties for sale and they are not selling. This is issue that needs addressing first.
The TFG report also highlights that many properties are being switched to short-term lets, where regulation is weaker and income can be higher. That’s contributing to reduced rental availability, too. You’re right that tax and policy changes have caused some to exit, but it’s only one part of the picture, like most things – nuance is important.
As a specialist in nuanced comments, you are well qualified to say this Benjamin.
Thanks, Atticus — I’ll take that as a compliment.
It’s easy to focus on the negative – on the flip side this brings people to Brighton and Hove who spend money in local businesses.
Brighton is, and always has been very much a tourist destination.
Walk around The Laines and there are a lot of empty premises. The North Laine has some gaps too. This impacts council income too.
Gaps also result in a negative spiral. Before long it will just be vape shops and cafes.
I don’t own a rental nor a local business but worry for the future of the towns economy.
I think it’s worth zooming out: the growing number of empty premises is less about STL regulation and more to do with structural issues like low economic growth and declining working-age population.
Brighton’s fertility rate is one of the lowest in the UK, and that’s already showing in school closures and shrinking demand for family services. When fewer young families can afford to live here, you lose the stable, year-round footfall that local businesses rely on.
No number of weekend tourists can replace that.
About Time!
I’m a member of the committee that produced the Short Term Lets report (representing the Community & Voluntary Sector). We spent a lot of time researching the issues & carrying out interviews with operators and other councils, as well as Rachel Maskell MP who is trying to bring in legislation.
So please can anyone commenting here READ IT before coming out with knee-jerk comments. It’s not long (24 pages) but it does provide a comprehensive background to why action is needed, and what the council can (and can’t) do now.
It’s at https://democracy.brighton-hove.gov.uk/documents/s206363/Report%20of%20Short%20Term%20Lets%20Task%20Finish%20Group%20APX.%20n%201.pdf
Great piece of negativity and reason making for bringing in taxation by a different name.
Calling it “taxation by another name” misses the point. If someone is letting out a whole property for short stays year-round, it’s not just a bit of extra income; it’s commercial activity, and it should meet the same standards and obligations as any other business.
Thanks for all your work on this; the report is thorough and makes a compelling case for licensing. One thing I wanted to ask you is whether it’s been discussed if the upcoming devolution could give the area powers locally to actually implement some of these recommendations ourselves, rather than waiting for Westminster to act.
Given what’s been achieved in Wales and Scotland with licensing and use class powers, and with places like Cornwall pushing for STL powers in their trailblazer deal, I wonder if this is something we could ask for through the devolution negotiations. Even just getting control over planning use classes and a locally set licensing framework would be a huge step forward.
Is this something that’s come up in discussions with the TFG?
273000 arrivals to Brighton pa and police and environmental health report few complaints.
Report says they can’t determine effect on rentals of STL.
Airbnb hosts say they need to cover costs of their housing
More unjustified regulations. More financial pain for hosts. Less availability and choice for tourists will shrink the tourism spend.
Council has no understanding of a vibrant well managed local economy.
Karen, I think it’s fair to acknowledge that STLs support tourism and that many hosts rely on the income. But the report isn’t arguing against STLs, it’s arguing for fairness. Hotels and guesthouses have to meet safety standards, pay business rates, and arrange commercial waste so why shouldn’t full-time STLs do the same?
Your point about limited complaints is also misleading: the report notes many residents don’t report issues formally, instead going directly to operators or councillors. And lack of data is part of the very problem the report is trying to solve.
A well-managed local economy needs both housing and tourism. Letting STLs operate without oversight risks undermining both.