Ex-professional footballer scores own goal as landlord of unlicensed properties

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.”

Sprift 2 end of article
x

Email the story to a friend

3 Comments

  1. Orson67

    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.

    Report
  2. PeeBee

     “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?

    Report
    1. DarrelKwong43

      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. 

      Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Leave a reply

If you want to create a user account so you can log in, click here

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.