A local council is specifically targeting rogue letting agents this week as part of a London-wide week focusing on the work of Trading Standards.
Camden Council, which has over 600 letting agents operating in its borough, is promoting a new poster explaining tenants’ rights.
Camden Council’s action this week follows a successful prosecution of a letting agent and two lettings companies.
Michael Zanon, Fortune Green and Galenon, and Nathiam, were fined £60,000 at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court.
An early morning raid of an unlicensed HMO found eight tenants living in overcrowded and dangerous conditions.
Cllr Meric Apak, cabinet member at Camden Council, said: “A large proportion of Camden’s residents rent privately and pay through the nose to do so.
“The very least they can expect in return is to live in a safe, accessible home with decent living space.”
Zanon and his companies were prosecuted last year for identical offences, said the council.
Zanon will now be served with a notice for inclusion on the Ministry of Housing’s national database of rogue letting agents and landlords.
Comments (5)
More boroughs should do the same. Close down these rogue agents who are a problem for our industry.
They should also look at flyboarding and boards left up more than 14 days after completed transaction.
Agreed, that genuinely dubious agents should be held to account, however in the interest of balance…
How about a clampdown on ”rogue” borough Councils- The sort that advise non-rent paying tenants to ”sit tight” until the bailiffs are at the door (I.e. those Councils who, through their advice to some Tenants, cost Landlords multiples of thousands of pounds, placing the Landlord in financial dire straits)?
Eyereaderturnedposter12 I agree, those councils that encourage contempt of court by instructing people to ignore an order of the court. I suspect this is inciting a criminal action and is certainly contrary to Government guidelines for councils. My personal view is that you sue for the tenant for missing rent and costs and take it through to bankruptcy. You are never likely to get your money and it will cost you but at least you know that the person who is wrecking your life has their life wrecked for a few years whilst the bankruptcy is live.
Sadly Will, the cost, time and stress involved in seeking to sue a Tenant who vacated a property, with arrears is on balance, not really worth it or at least many Landlords take this view (with the caveat that in certain instances, I.e. in respect of particularly ‘pricey’ properties, and where arrears are excessive [granted any arrears can be consider excessive!] it may indeed be ‘worth it’).
When you consider that the likelihood is that a Tenant in arrears, either has very little, or no income/funds- the result is usually an AEO (through the usual Small Claims Court processes), at £19 per week for the next ‘X’ number of years (or decades!). Again, the result of a system which penalises those viewed as ”wealthy” land/property owners (more often than not, of course we know Landlords aren’t cognac swilling, cigar smoking ‘fat cats’) and supports those who may either deliberately or through no fault, abuse the aforementioned system.
I acknowledge it is “not worth it financially” but it is a route anyone can take; even if it is vendictive!.