20 Fairlawn Mansions, New Cross Road
LON/00AZ/HMF/2024/0058 · Lewisham · decided 28 Oct 2024 · rent repayment order
old rules| Offence | Unlicensed HMO |
|---|---|
| Landlord | Individual |
| Applicants | 3 tenants |
| Rent | not stated as one figure |
| Period the order relates to | 18 Apr 2022 to 17 Apr 2023 |
| Maximum the tribunal could award | not stated as one figure (or not yet checked); £2,063.92 then deducted for utilities |
| Amount the tribunal ordered | £3,512.71 per applicant on average; £10,538.14 in total for 3 applicants |
| Share of the maximum | 60%, as the tribunal stated it |
| Tribunal fees to be reimbursed | £540 |
| 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
for is then the starting point (in the sense that term is used in criminal sentencing); it is the default penalty in the absence of any other factors but it may be higher or lower in light of the final step: d. Consider whether any deduction from, or addition to, that figure should be made in the light of the other factors set out in section 44(4).” 14. … Awards of up to 85% or 90% of the rent paid (net of services) are not unknown but are not the norm. Factors which have tended to result in higher penalties include that the offence was committed deliberately or by a commercial landlord or an individual with a larger property portfolio or whether the tenants have been exposed to poor or dangerous conditions which have been prolonged by the failure to licence. Factors which tend to justify lower penalties include inadvertence on the part of the smaller landlord, property in good condition such that a licence would have been granted without one being required and mitigating factors which go some way to explaining the offence without excusing it such as the failure of a letting agent to warn of the need for a licence or personal incapacity due to poor health” 17. In that case the Upper Tribunal noted that the landlord was not a professional landlord and that he had had committed the offence of controlling an unlicenced HMO through inadvertence rather than deliberately. …
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 SE14 5PH · Licensing schemes and register for SE14 5PH
Past decisions are not a prediction. The tribunal decides each case on its facts, including the landlord's and tenant's conduct.