A landlord has been fined over £25,000 after admitting 12 licensing offences.
Former professional footballer Dexter Blackstock appeared at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court where he faced charges relating to 12 unlicensed properties he owned and which were required to be licensed under either Part 2 or 3 of the Housing Act.
Ex-Nottingham Forest striker Blackstock, 33, was convicted of nine offences of failing to license properties under the selective licensing scheme.
He also failed to license two properties under the additional licensing scheme – with one other offence under mandatory licensing for another flat.
Blackstock was fined £24,000 with £1,100 costs and a victim surcharge of £170.
Paul James, 54, of Nottingham, who managed the properties, also faces ten charges – seven for selective licensing breaches, two for additional licensing and one for mandatory licensing. His case has been adjourned until November.
The prosecution was brought by Nottingham City Council’s safer housing team.
The court heard that the total rental income for the 12 properties was more than £10,500 a month. It would have cost £12,180 to license them for a period of five years.
Cllr Linda Woodings, portfolio holder for planning, housing and heritage at Nottingham City Council, said: “Properties have to be licensed for a good reason – to provide higher standards, regular maintenance and, most importantly, to make sure that tenants across the city are safe and living in acceptable conditions.
“Mr Blackstock has continually placed his profits over ensuring that these homes were appropriately licensed.”
Cllr Linda Woodings, portfolio holder for planning, housing and heritage at Nottingham City Council, said: “Properties have to be licensed for a good reason – to provide us with loads of lovely cash for virtually no effort, just the way us Clowncillors and our greedy grasping money grabbing staff like it.
Is what she should have said.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
“Properties have to be licensed for a good reason – to provide higher standards, regular maintenance and, most importantly, to make sure that tenants across the city are safe and living in acceptable conditions.”
Erm… have I missed something here?
Is there a single charge relating to the condition of one of the “offending” properties?
Or is it – as seems to be the case – simply that the Landlord failed to register otherwise perfectly acceptable properties?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
the news articles on the story claim that smoke alarms were not working and other issues were present such as rodents etc. whatever your thoughts on licensing, its the law, and most comply.
Its the minority like Blackstock, who created the impression that all landlords are rogue, hence the imposition of licensing etc. TBH, I would favour higher penatlies, like taking properites away from landlords who fail to comply. £25k is not a penalty in realilty, when your rented income is £10k a month.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register