56B Marquis Road, Camden, London NW1 8UB
LON/00AG/HMF/2021/0029 · Camden · decided 18 Feb 2022 · rent repayment order
old rules| Offence | Unlicensed HMO |
|---|---|
| Landlord | Individual |
| Applicants | 3 tenants |
| Rent | not stated as one figure |
| Period the order relates to | 14 Jul 2019 to 13 Jun 2020 |
| Maximum the tribunal could award | not stated as one figure (or not yet checked) |
| Amount the tribunal ordered | £5,488 per applicant on average; £16,464 in total for 3 applicants |
| Share of the maximum | 80%, as the tribunal stated it |
| Tribunal fees to be reimbursed | £300 |
| Rules | Old rules (offence before 1 May 2026): maximum 12 months' rent. |
Read from the PDF automatically. Amounts are totals for the decision, across all its applicants; the maximum is left out of the statistics until it has been checked.
From the tribunal's reasons on the amount
conduct of both landlord and tenant, the landlord’s financial circumstances and whether the landlord has been prosecuted. … There is no evidence to demonstrate that the landlord has been prosecuted. … The Tribunal reject the respondent’s assertions that the applicants’ conduct was poor. The applicants took occupation and took on the responsibilities of the 2018 tenancy agreement with his permission. Nor did the applicants obstruct him from inspecting. They merely asked for 24 hours’ notice. … He has asserted throughout that the applicants had sublet contrary to the terms of the lease. This is not made out. He further asserts that the applicants were in some way illegally occupying the property because the original tenancy agreement had expired, although the tenancy had become a statutory periodic one. … This is not made out. He failed to assert that any rent was due or owing by the applicants for the relevant period. … The Tribunal finds that the respondent showed poor conduct in relation to his responsibilities as a landlord and his behaviour towards the applicants as follows: - a. The respondent has failed to comply with the HMO licencing requirements and his duties as landlord since 2015, despite his knowledge of these requirements. b. … Indeed, the only photographic evidence produced of the property was from the applicants which does not demonstrate any dampness. c. …
An extract from the part of the decision that sets the amount. To keep people's names out, any sentence that might contain one is left out (marked …). The full reasons are in the original decision.
The original
Other rent repayment orders near NW1 8UB · Licensing schemes and register for NW1 8UB
Past decisions are not a prediction. The tribunal decides each case on its facts, including the landlord's and tenant's conduct.