A landlord has failed in a last-ditch attempt to convince a property tribunal that he shouldn’t have to pay a rent repayment order – and has been stung with a £13,643 bill.

John Campbell had been told by a tribunal last April to pay £15,900 for failing to licence his rental property but appealed as he said he had not been given “sufficient opportunity” to state his case.

Campbell argued that he was incorrectly identified as the landlord of the property in Cazenove Road, London, and that the four tenants had failed to produce the countersigned contracts and associated deposit certificates which were all in the name of Fixbrook Consultancy Limited.

But the tribunal rejected this; at the previous hearing he had told the tribunal categorically that he was the landlord.

No publicity

Campbell, director of property investment and management firm Hackney 4 Ltd, claimed he was unaware the three-bedroom flat was covered by Hackney’s additional licensing and selective licensing schemes as he had seen no publicity or received any notification.

The previous tribunal had serious concerns about the landlord’s conduct in relation to standards in the property where he had delegated several management responsibilities to the tenants.

It also pointed to persistent damp and the presence of mould, his failure to replace an aging boiler which kept breaking down, and the fact there was no communal space other than the kitchen.

Exaggerated

In the latest hearing, Campbell said the tenants’ claims were exaggerated, that they had been given too much time to state their case, and that the tribunal had made legal errors.

The judge dismissed this and ruled there was nothing in Campbell’s latest submission that contradicted the conclusion he had committed the offence of controlling or managing an unlicensed HMO.

Although the tribunal reduced their RRO payout, it awarded the four tenants £600 costs. Read the judgement in full.