Council takes action against student accommodation company fined £80,000 for HMO breaches

City of Lincoln Council has proposed revoking the licence of Orange Living Limited, which trades as Loc8me, following a conviction in 2019 for four offences of operating an unlicensed house in multiple occupation (HMO).

LincolnshireLive is reporting that the council has determined that both Orange Living Limited and its director Raffaele Russo are ‘not fit and proper’ to hold a HMO licence or manage a licensed HMO. The Council is now taking legal action.

The firm was previously called Charlestown Student Properties Limited.

EYE reported in October 2019 that Loc8me was fined £80,000 for HMO failures after an investigation by Charnwood Borough Council which was triggered by a fire in the attic of one of the homes managed by the firm in Loughborough.

The attic blaze was attended by firefighters who found that the smoke detector had batteries missing, and that there were insufficient fire doors.

According to their website, Loc8me now provides student accommodation in Hull, Lincoln, Loughborough, London, Nottingham and Cardiff.

Sara Boothright, environmental health and corporate safety manager at City of Lincoln Council, is reported as saying:

“The council is currently involved in an ongoing legal process with Charlestown Student Properties Limited and Orange Living Limited (trading as Locate8Me).

“It would, therefore, be inappropriate for us to comment further at this stage.”

Raffaele Russo declined to comment on the LincolnshireLive story.

Loc8me is the trading name of Orange Living Limited/Orange Bricks Ltd.

The last filed accounts for Orange Bricks Ltd were to 31st March 2019 and showed Capital and Reserves of £32,371.

The last filed accounts for Orange Living Limited were to 31st March 2020 and show a Capital and Reserves figure of minus £499,960 (2018: minus £96,617)

Agent is fined £80,000 over HMO failures discovered after blaze in attic

Sprift 3 end of article
x

Email the story to a friend

4 Comments

  1. singlelayer

    Of course the landlord should have all the correct licences (although often they’re just money-making bits of paper. They can sod off with the safety argument…Grenfell, anyone??), but this could cause more than just the landlord problems. A mistake or even wilful error in one property/area of the country means you can lose your licences, through no longer being ‘fit & proper’ in other parts of the country (even though in yet other areas still there may not even be licensing and you’d be okay to carry on or those areas have differing licence conditions that, in some instances, means you would have lost your licence for a particular ‘offence’ in the other area/s), which, if you are a large provider of, say, student accommodation, could have a massive impact on property available locally.

     

     

    Report
  2. paulgbar666

    It DOESN’T strike me as natural justice if because of one property a LL is deemed unfit to operate other properties anywhere in the country.

    This could result in tenants being booted out of properties that are perfectly OK.

    One duff property DOESN’T automatically mean the LL ISN’T capable of operating others correctly.

    Any restrictions should be for the property concerned.

     

    Report
  3. Gedflintoff

    This is a great not spamming other website and we should Follow this link  like me

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

More top news stories

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.