Dear Mr Crofton Briggs

Planning Policy Team
Oxford City Council
10 St Ebbe’s Street
Oxford, OX1 1PT
Re. Opposition to Options A, B and C of Policy CS23 in Section A4.16-34 of the
Sites and Housing Development Plan Document – Consultation
Dear Mr Crofton Briggs
I don’t understand why it is now so difficult for me to rent a house or apartment with my
friends. We have been living as a group for some time and have never had this problem
before. We are all in our late twenties/early thirties and are in professional employment.
I just cannot understand why you are treating all HMOs as a problem: a property with
three trainee nurses is viewed the same as a house with eight students – this is
madness and dangerous.
Apparently the City Council is pushing two new pieces of legislation into force:
From January 2012 all 3-people properties that are not let to a family will require a
licence at a cost to the landlord of £1,150 over 5 years.
From February 2012, Oxford City Council intends to restrict the number of sharers’
properties and in some areas of Oxford there will be no new sharers’ properties.
Your policy changes are already causing problems and these will get worse:
1. There is already less rental accommodation. Many landlords do not want to incur the
HMO expense and so are refusing to let to groups like mine.
2. Rents for sharers properties will rise as supply is reduced.
3. In Section A4.35-46 you say you want more Key Worker housing – by reducing the
supply of HMOs you will do precisely the opposite.
With a view to being constructive, may I propose a more effective policy instead of
Options A, B and C of Policy CS23 in Section A4.16-34:
1. The rationing of HMOs to 20% of a street or section of a street should only apply to
‘large’ HMOs of 5+ students
2. The definition of an HMO should not include any household where all people are in
full time employment. This would maximize the housing stock for the growing tenant
cohort of 20-30 year olds and key workers
My name:
My address: