NEWS


Fines and prosecutions


Landlord fined nearly £33,000 for safety breaches Another inspection of both the


RUSSELL WAYNE Price from Newmarket, Suffolk, was found guilty of 15 charges at Ipswich Magistrates Court. Newmarket Journal reported


on the prosecution of Mr Price, who was said to have ‘exposed his tenants to significant risk’ at two properties on Lisburn Road in the town. He let these as houses in multiple occupation (HMOs), with both subject to prohibition orders served in 2008 and 2010 that banned them from ‘being used as HMOs’.


At court, Mr Price was charged


properties was carried out in December 2016, which found safety concerns including ‘a lack of fire detection and escape routes, a lack of gas or electrical safety certificates and a loose electrical socket’. Other issues identified included


‘exposed pipework, stairs with no handrail and damp and mould’, with neither property inspected by officials said to have ‘offered an acceptable standard of living conditions’.


with 15 offences, 13 of which were under the Housing Act 2004, and he denied all charges at another hearing, with the additional two charges relating to his failure to ‘provide information when requested’. District judge Timothy King said


‘there was a significant risk of harm to individuals’, and that Mr Price had ‘cut corners’, ordering him to pay charges and fines totalling £25,900, increasing to £32,980 with council costs added


Guest house owner fined £250,000


MEHMOOD BUTT was fined after a prosecution undertaken by London Fire Brigade (LFB), with his property described as a ‘potential death trap’. LFB reported on the prosecution


of Mr Butt, who owned the City View Guest House in Bethnal Green, and was converting it into guest house accommodation ‘from a house in multiple occupation’. To do this, he had been ‘removing the internal staircase to put in a lift and fitting an open external staircase to the rear of the property’, which would have been the ‘only emergency means of escape’. He undertook this work despite an application for the refurbishment being turned down due to safety concerns, and when building inspectors visited in March 2014, they notified LFB, who sent fire safety officers to investigate. They issued Mr Butt with an enforcement notice ‘requiring the inadequate


corridor that ‘acted as a means of escape’, while there had been a ‘failure to address’ concerns around the external staircase, which was unprotected ‘in the event of a fire’. Other fire safety issues identified


emergency stairs and other fire safety defects to be addressed’, and a follow up visit that July revealed that ‘almost none of the deficiencies identified had been corrected’. In turn, this second visit further


revealed a ‘host of other fire safety failings’, including evidence that rooms on the building’s second floor were being used for sleeping ‘despite fire safety concerns’. In turn, there were ‘inadequate’ fire doors in a number of rooms leading to a


included ‘inadequate smoke detection’ in guest house rooms, a lack of fire protection in the new lift shaft ‘which could have led to rapid fire and smoke spread’, and blocked escape routes to safety ‘from the emergency external staircase’. After this visit, officers issued a prohibition notice ‘restricting the use of the guest house to the ground floor’. At court, Mr Butt pleaded guilty


to four offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, and was handed a £250,000 fine and a six month suspended prison sentence. Additionally, he was ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £14,200, and given a nightly curfew of 9pm to 6am


Safety failings land Foxtons with £35,000 fine


FOXTONS HAS been fined £35,000 and must pay £3,603 costs for failing to prove to Tower Hamlets that a house it was letting was safe for tenants. According to home.co.uk, Bow


magistrates court heard Foxtons had ignored requests to provide safety certificates showing that the gas, electrical and fire alarm installations at the property had been checked. It had failed to provide these over an 18 month period and to submit details of the landlord and tenants.


While the house was believed to be in good condition, Foxtons’ failure to comply demonstrated a lack of regard for its duty to comply with legal requirements. The company pleaded guilty, saying it prided itself on its reputation as one of the county’s largest agents and was ashamed and remorseful of the failings that led to the offence. The charge was brought under Section 236(1) of the Housing Act 2004 for failure to comply with a notice


12 FEBRUARY 2018 www.frmjournal.com


served under Section 235, requiring a ‘person with a relevant interest in a property’ to provide documents ‘for any purpose connected with its housing enforcement functions’. Deputy mayor of Tower Hamlets,


Sirajul Islam, said: ‘This case has sent a very strong message out to landlords and agents’. The fines took into account the size of the company, its profits and the ease with which it could have provided the information


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60