Serious neglect in rented homes revealed by council inspections

Rotherham Council operates a selective licensing policy, where privately rented properties must be signed up in some areas of the town.

Now the authority’s housing spokeswoman, Cllr Sarah Allen, has published statistics which show just over 2,000 inspections of properties were conducted between 2020 and 2025 - with more than two thirds of those found to have ‘category one’ or ‘category two’ hazards, problems deemed to adversely affect tenants.

Of those, 584 were the most serious, “possibly life-threatening”, she said, affecting 281 different properties. That indicates some homes had multiple serious problems.

She said: “Due to the reluctance of private tenants to complain about their landlords for fear of rent increases or eviction, the majority of these hazards would not have been discovered or rectified if selective licensing had not been operating a proactive inspection programme.

“Each of the 2,021 households have had the opportunity to speak to a council officer and obtain advice and assistance in a range of matters.

“A few weeks ago officers found a property that had a hole in the first floor bathroom floor.

“The floorboards had rotted and also the joists supporting the floorboards due to a water leak.

“The room below was being used as a dining room where the ceiling had collapsed, and the hole was of sufficient size for the occupants to fall through.

“This would not have been discovered without selective licensing,” she said.

Cllr Allen was responding to a question raised by Cllr Michael Bennett Sylvester, asking the council’s opinion of the benefits of the scheme for tenants.

He said he was in “full agreement” with her comments, though said he would like to see the obligation on private landlords to be licensed to be extended across the borough, rather than being limited to some districts.

He also expressed concern that the license fee was too low to finance a “vigorous” inspection regime and said a consultation on the future of the scheme “has been too accommodating to landlords at the expense of vulnerable and marginalised tenants who would have justifiable concerns of retribution should they be seen to publicly support the scheme.”