A landlord must repay three tenants more than £20,000 in rent after he failed to convince a tribunal that he wasn’t aware of an additional licensing scheme.

Tope Osazee argued that the City of Westminster failed to notify him personally that the property - in Sherwood Court, Bryanston Place - was subject to an HMO licence; when he found out, he immediately applied. However, the landlord did not have an HMO licence for the property from 30th August 2021 to 18th April 2023.

The First Tier Property Tribunal judge said Osazee's understanding of a council’s legal responsibilities to inform individual landlords was incorrect. He ruled that Osazee’s case for reasonable excuse boiled down to one of ignorance and was not a defence.

Inspection

Following an inspection, environmental health officers had issued an improvement notice which identified a category 1 hazard of excess cold and a category 2 hazard of damp and mould at the property. It also had inadequate fire safety arrangements.

The landlord said he had responded promptly to his tenants’ requests for repairs, and that they had chosen not to put on the heating because of the cost. However, an inspection also revealed that the third bedroom was below the national minimum room size for an adult, which would have contravened HMO licence conditions during the relevant period.

Professional

Osazee said he owned seven to eight properties of which five were currently being let for rent and that he managed all but one of these. He denied he was a professional landlord, saying it was a side business to his main activity as a recruitment specialist – however, the tribunal disagreed.

The judge added: “The respondent did not give sufficient attention to his responsibilities as a landlord….the tribunal decides that the respondent was reckless with the management of his letting business which had serious consequences for the applicants.”

It told him to pay 75% of the £27,848 rent repayment order claimed.

Photo: Google