A mystery legal challenge has put the brakes on a new scheme to licence rentals in parts of the city centre – but the council is refusing to say who lodged it, or on what grounds.
Brighton and Hove City Council has already begun a licensing scheme in
The main difference between the two stages of the scheme is how they were implemented. The order covering the first five wards – Kemptown, Moulsecoomb and Bevendean, Queens Park and Whitehawk and Marina – was voted for by the council’s cabinet in public.
However this second stage of two wards – Regency and Central Hove – was approved by officers using delegated powers.
Since the plans for the first stage was approved, the government has announced its own landlord licensing scheme, with very similar aims.
Brighton and Hove News asked the council three times, starting last Friday, what the basis of the legal challenge was, who was making it, and to which court or other authority – and why no details were being shared.
The first response we received on Wednesday was: “Unfortunately, we cannot provide any further information at this stage due to the ongoing legal process.”
The second was: “Our legal team have advised that we’re not in a position to share those details at the moment.”
No response was received to the third question about why this basic information couldn’t be shared.
The legal challenge means landlord consultations have been paused.
Councillor Gill Williams, Cabinet Member for Housing, said: “We remain committed to supporting safe, good-quality housing across the city and to working constructively with landlords, agents and tenants.
“We have decided to pause the introduction of the scheme planned for 20 October while we review the next steps. This will give us time to ensure that any future implementation is built on the strongest possible foundations.
“We are grateful to the many landlords and agents who have engaged with us positively during the development of the scheme. Their feedback and participation will continue to inform our work to raise standards in the private rented sector.
“We recognise the vital role that responsible landlords play in providing homes for local people and we remain committed to working in partnership with them to raise standards across the private rented sector.”
Good. The government are about to bring in their own nationwide licencing scheme. How would it be legal for councils to have their own on top? Double bubble.
At £740 per property, it looks like just a money raising measure by BHCC as the proposed licencing duplicates what is already in place in national legislation and will duplicate the pending national landlord database (March 2027). It will just further drive-up rents as landlords can’t absorb costs like this in the Brighton market where ROI on private residential rentals is now less than bank interest. The challenge may contend that requiring licences for an estimated 7,274 properties is disproportionate to the problems identified, especially if those problems are concentrated in only parts of the wards. The evidence base does not support licensing across the whole ward. Given that the council had already completed consultation, designated the areas on 6 July 2026, and the challenge was notified only 7 days away from implementation on 20 October 2026, the most likely grounds are either the adequacy of the evidence base or the consultation process.
Not exactly cutting administration and associated costs, just more sneaky stuff coming in the back door, if you can still afford one.
Has anyone asked hove politician and property magnate Angela Rayner ?
Look at the Interim Report published by the Council – it’s basically a “TV License” for Property. Pay fee get license! “Total number of full licences issued to date: 1,399 licences were issued, of which 50 were subject to a late fee.
Year 1: Drafts: 516, full: 197, 24 late fees.
Year 2: Drafts: 2239, full: 1204, 26 late fees (midpoint figures).”
Of those licenses granted,
“Total number of licences refused to date: 0.”
100% compliance – well done BHCC. Under the Housing Act 2004, local authorities in England require the designated licence holder to have a physical address within the United Kingdom where legally binding statutory notices and court documents can be officially served. 2 of their buildings are in Kemptown where applicant address is recorded for 1 as Belvederegasse 18/3, Vienna, 1040, Austria and the other gives address their account moved from in April 2025! Both have blank Agents Address!
Current planning exists for amongst other defects,
i) Bay Cracks can be seen at each level of the bay which the structural
engineer has concluded show evidence of subsidence thus the bay
is to be stabilised and renovated.
iv) Staircase The structural engineer deems this stabilising work essential to protect
the staircase from further movement and possible future collapse.
The new steel strapping will be concealed behind the wall finish so
the appearance of the staircase will be unaffected.
3 of the 10 units in my building are currently uninhabitable due to the ongoing works but all 10 have had licenses approved and issued by the council in a building with active subsidence and an original open well void,, cantilevered staircase at risk of “possible future collapse”. This passes PSH Teams HHSRS inspection!!!! During said inspection Aug 2025 [10 units in an afternoon] PSH Team failed to mention my unit was marked “VACANT” since July 2024 and Long-Term VACANT since July 2025 so my complaints could be ignored. A resident of a long-term vacant address has no legal standing!
My 23 sqm “Studio” unit went into selective licensing process identified as “Room 8”, paid fee and emerged the other side of licensing as a 2 room flat with “Bedrooms: 1, Living Rooms: 1, Total Rooms: 2” according to Selective Licensing Register!
I estimate my landlords annual rent roll to be in excess of £300,000 per annum and in their Austrian Accounts [which they falsely claimed on UK Establishment Register they are exempt from publishing] there is no evidence that they have ever paid a penny of Tax on in the UK since they acquired their £4.625m portfolio buying 1st building 2017-01-04 for £925,000, 2nd 2020-12-04 for £1,700,000 and 3rd 2021-07-15 for £2,000,000.
This is why property is so expensive in Brighton and Hove – because our council have made it Mecca for Property Crime.
This is just another stealth tax.