Fah Hor Chong v Eleonora Severgnini & Ors
[2024] UKUT 348 (LC)
Paul Fashade v Mailna Albustin & Ors
7 February 2023
[2023] UKUT 40 (LC)
Upper Tribunal
A landlord was ordered to pay back rent for having an unlicensed house. He said he tried to get a license but couldn't because of the pandemic. A higher court said the first court didn't listen properly and sent the case back to be decided again.
Key Facts
- •Mr Fashade appealed a rent repayment order of £8,350.39 and £2,880.55 for operating an unlicensed HMO at 316 Devonshire Road, Lewisham.
- •The HMO was unlicensed from 13 August 2020 to 13 January 2022, overlapping with COVID-19 lockdowns.
- •Fashade claimed he attempted to renew the license but faced difficulties due to the pandemic.
- •The FTT didn't consider Fashade's evidence regarding license renewal attempts due to lack of email documentation.
- •The FTT based the repayment amount on total rent paid, with minimal deductions, not considering the offence's seriousness.
Legal Principles
A person commits an offence if they control an HMO required to be licensed but isn't.
Section 72(1), Housing Act 2004
It's a defence if a licence application was duly made and still effective.
Section 72(4)(b), Housing Act 2004
It's a defence if there was a reasonable excuse for managing an unlicensed HMO.
Section 72(5), Housing Act 2004
The burden of proving reasonable excuse lies on the landlord.
I.R. Management Services Ltd v Salford City Council [2020] UKUT 81 (LC)
When determining the amount of a rent repayment order, the seriousness of the offence must be considered, along with landlord and tenant conduct, landlord's financial circumstances, and previous convictions.
Section 44(4), Housing and Planning Act 2016; Williams v Parmar [2021] UKUT 244 (LC); Acheampong v Roman [2022] UKUT 239 (LC)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The FTT failed to properly consider Fashade's evidence of attempts to renew the license, impacting both the finding of the offence and the quantum of the repayment.
FTT's decision set aside and remitted.
Insufficient information to substitute a determination; FTT's omissions necessitate redetermination by a different panel.