(x3) 1 Driffield Road, London, E3 5NE (1), (2), (3).
LON/00BG/HMF/2024/0704 · Tower Hamlets · decided 22 Jun 2026 · rent repayment order
period not statedfigures not yet checked| Offence | Unlicensed HMO |
|---|---|
| Landlord | Individual |
| Applicants | 3 tenants |
| Rent | not stated as one figure |
| Maximum the tribunal could award | not stated as one figure |
| Amount the tribunal ordered | £350 per applicant on average; £1,050 in total for 3 applicants |
| Share of the maximum | not stated |
| Tribunal fees to be reimbursed | £550 |
| Rules | Period not stated, so the rules can't be told. |
Read from the PDF automatically. Amounts are totals for the decision, across all its applicants; the amount hasn't been checked yet and is left out of the statistics, so compare it with the original.
From the tribunal's reasons on the amount
amount? The exercise of the tribunal’s discretion. The Applicants asked the tribunal to exercise its discretion and make an RRO. The decision of the tribunal. The tribunal determines to exercise its discretion to make a rent repayment order. The reasons for the decision of the tribunal. The tribunal considered the evidence and determined that it was appropriate for it to exercise its discretion and make a rent repayment order because there had been a clear breach of the law. The maximum amount of the RRO which can be ordered. The Applicants each produced evidence of having paid rent. … The Applicants were responsible for all utility payments. … The decision of the tribunal. … The Applicants have each provided evidence of payment of rent for their period of claim. … Other arguments concerning the amount of the RRO to be awarded. … The Applicants argue that their conduct has been good. … The Applicants argue that the conduct of the Respondent was poor (i) No written tenancy agreement has been provided for them. … The Respondent provided details in September 2024. (ii) The Applicants say that there were no safety certificates provided, and no statutorily required information provided. (iii) The Applicants say that the Respondent turned up without notice on several occasions. (iv) The Applicants say that the property was in poor condition and lacked working smoke alarms. …
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 E3 5NE · Licensing schemes and register for E3 5NE
Past decisions are not a prediction. The tribunal decides each case on its facts, including the landlord's and tenant's conduct.