Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Winchester landlord fined ~£30k for operating illegal HMO.


Recommended Posts

The students should get a nice refund. A good news story in these difficult times.

A WINCHESTER landlord has been ordered to pay nearly £30,000 in refunded rent for not having a HMO licence.

Gurjiven Singh Chhokran had been renting out 72 Stuart Crescent, Stanmore, to students without the correct permissions.

Following a court hearing, he must now pay a total of £28,400 – despite claiming that Winchester City Council had lost his application.

In a report by a tribunal, it states that Mr Chhokran was using the property as a seven-bedroom HMO which was not licensed for the period of October 1 2018 to December 2 2019.

Read more

https://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/18797754.winchester-landlord-taken-tribunal-university-students/#:~:text=Gurjiven Singh Chhokran had been,Council had lost his application.

Edited by spacedin
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • spacedin changed the title to Winchester landlord fined ~£30k for failing to licence HMO

OUCH.

 

Bethan Stevens, Eleanor Scalley, Sam Loyd-Bisley, Giles Pickett, Michael Antony, Eloise Pepper and Elliot Phillips are one group of students who applied for a refund.

Mr Chhokran must pay each of them £2,571.43, totalling £18,000.

He must also pay each of the second set of applicants £1,428.57, totalling £10,000.

Both sets will also be paid £200 to cover the hearing costs.

The Chronicle has tried to contact Mr Chhokran.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's got to be a rush for the exit soon: landlords haven't had any rents in months and can't even get evictions through the courts. 

If they still owe 50% of the mortgage, they'll be a limit to how much longer they'll want to pile up losses month after month. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There's got to be a rush for the exit soon: landlords haven't had any rents in months and can't even get evictions through the courts. 

If they still owe 50% of the mortgage, they'll be a limit to how much longer they'll want to pile up losses month after month. 

I cannot see an exit, as who is going to buy if you have tenants in the properties who will not leave or pay rent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I cannot see an exit, as who is going to buy if you have tenants in the properties who will not leave or pay rent.

Just offer tenants a deposit on their next place and they (usually) leave voluntarily.  

It's only no exit if you're going through the courts. Most tenants are just poor, not hostile. 

So a little money lubricates the transition. Win win. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There's got to be a rush for the exit soon: landlords haven't had any rents in months and can't even get evictions through the courts. 

If they still owe 50% of the mortgage, they'll be a limit to how much longer they'll want to pile up losses month after month. 

90% of rent is currently being paid as per NLA, which has a bias to overstate the negative to get further government support 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Does that include vacant ? 

Nope. That's additional void costs. 

If you have a London flat empty at the moment you will have to drop the price significantly to get someone in. 

If you have a coastal property at a guess you will have your arm bitten off from people wanting to try before you buy. 

Its not as simple as saying rent isn't being paid or there are no demand for tennacys. 

Market has gone weird for a while. If this is the new normal who knows 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • spacedin changed the title to Winchester landlord fined ~£30k for operating illegal HMO.
 

Nope. That's additional void costs. 

If you have a London flat empty at the moment you will have to drop the price significantly to get someone in. 

If you have a coastal property at a guess you will have your arm bitten off from people wanting to try before you buy. 

Its not as simple as saying rent isn't being paid or there are no demand for tennacys. 

Market has gone weird for a while. If this is the new normal who knows 

I was surprised by 90% of rents still being paid, but if it doesn't include empty properties then that would make more sense. 

We'll see as winter progresses.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

 

HMO landlord fined £20,000 after letting unsafe properties

 

A LANDLORD has been fined £20,000 after letting properties which did not meet fire safety requirements and exposing residents to a ‘serious risk of death’.

Kristian Johnstone, of Suffolk Road in Altrincham and director of Easylet Residential and Relocate NW Ltd, owns a property on Evelyn Street in Sankey Bridges and rents out properties on Goulden Street in Bewsey and Algernon Street in Fairfield.

The properties were functioning as houses in multiple occupation (HMOs), as there were three or more tenants forming two or more households living in the properties and sharing basic amenities at a time.

The 28-year-old was convicted for offences relating to the fire safety requirements of the three properties under the HMO Management Regulations and also for failing to licence a HMO.

Johnstone pleaded guilty to 38 offences at Chester Magistrates’ Court on October 22. He was subsequently fined £20,000 and ordered to pay a £181 victim surcharge.

READ> The latest coronavirus case figures for Warrington

Before sentencing, the judge said that a ‘significant number of people were exposed to a serious risk of death’.

The judge added that the offences showed a ‘complete failure to grapple with the regulatory regime’, and that there were multiple failings to provide safe accommodation for a large number of tenants.

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/18922078.hmo-landlord-fined-20-000-letting-unsafe-properties/

Edited by spacedin
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Fines seem to be getting off easy, but luckily no one died, just serious risk of death.

Given he commited 38 offences and was operating HMOs, you have to wonder how many lives he put at risk. Also the lives he put at risk prior to when recent legislation was brought in.

And surely someone who is so negligent on such serious matters should at the very least receive a suspended sentence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Given he commited 38 offences and was operating HMOs, you have to wonder how many lives he put at risk. Also the lives he put at risk prior to when recent legislation was brought in.

And surely someone who is so negligent on such serious matters should at the very least receive a suspended sentence. 

you'd think.... or at least community service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.