Agent hit with bill over unlicensed properties speaks out

A letting agent has been hit with a bill of nearly £10,000 after managing two unlicensed properties.

Homes4u, in Manchester, was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay £2,825 costs.

Manchester Council officers received a complaint from a tenant in one of the properties about a lack of fire alarms.

On inspection, it was found that both properties were unlicensed three-storey HMOs.

Cllr Bernard Priest, deputy leader of Manchester City Council, said that the case carried “a message to managing agents that you aren’t free from prosecution. You have a responsibility to your tenants to provide good quality, safe housing”.

In a statement, homes4u told EYE: “We are extremely sorry and disappointed to find ourselves in this position having always worked closely with the city council in maintaining tenants’ safety as paramount.

“Although the company were processing the necessary applications, and licences have subsequently been granted, a number of difficult factors were influential, including delays by the owner completing the relevant paperwork.

“As a result we have reviewed all our internal procedures, increased our dedicated staffing resources and maintain our commitment to the city council in upholding the relevant legislation.

“Homes4u took a pragmatic approach in our plea, holding due regard to the valuable time resource of the City Council and the Courts.

“There is no doubt  that the burden of responsibility lies with the managing agent.

“Homes4u will continue  to protect tenants and  ensure that neither we nor our landlords are at risk of prosecution.

“However, we are concerned that if we have to end services through a lack of cooperation, this will inevitably leave tenants in a  vulnerable situation.”

* In a completely separate case, Manchester City Council also prosecuted landlord Rashpal Singh after a kitchen fire in a flat let to eight tenants.

Inspecting the property after the blaze, the council found it did not have the required licence and that its “high risk” kitchen was the only means of escape.

Singh was ordered to pay £15,672 because of breaching HMO legislation. He was also ordered to repay £11,884 of housing benefits received through letting the flat.

x

Email the story to a friend



Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.