Landlord and his letting agencies lose appeal against £105k fine
Waltham Forest landlord Asad Chaudery and two property firms had sought to challenge the selective licensing non-compliance fines on legal grounds.
A major multi-property landlord and his letting agencies in London have lost a fines appeal after taking their local authority to a Property Tribunal over a raft of disputed penalties for non-compliance with a local selective licensing scheme.
Asad Chaudery, who owns dozens of properties in and around Waltham Forest in North London, took the local council to a First Tier Property Tribunal after claiming that the application of the licensing scheme to his properties, and the nature of its ‘campaign’ against him, were unlawful.
The Tribunal, which had faced making appeal decisions for approximately 40 properties linked to Chaudery, instead chose six ‘test’ rented properties to deliberate upon including a house (pictured) and five flats.
The homes are owned by companies which Chaudery is a director of – including Zas Ventures and Interface Properties.
Two lettings agencies that manage properties on behalf of these companies were also involved including Let’s Move Properties and Marlborough Homes and between them were fined for non-compliance with the council’s selective licensing scheme and are now to pay the original £105,000 fines total.
The scheme began in 2015, covers some 26,000 rented properties, and charges £895 a property for a five-year licence.
Public documents published by the Tribunal show Chaudery takes a dim view of selective licensing, describing Waltham Forest’s enforcement efforts and scheme as “clearly illegal and [amounting] to demanding money on false pretences with malice”.
Seletive licensing
But his key legal arguments pivoted on two points – namely that a selective licence for a property cannot last longer than the scheme, that it was the agent not the landlord who should pay the fine, and that fining both agent and landlord was a ‘double punishment’.
Following a 66-page and exhaustive dissection of the arguments behind Chaudery’s appeal against the fines, Deputy Regional Judge N Carr rejected his points outright and upheld the penalties imposed on Chaudery’s companies and the letting agencies involved and the offences involved were “with his consent and connivance”.
The bill for Chaudery is likely to be significant – he had earlier promised to the letting agencies that he would pay any fines they incurred, the Tribunal was told, and he may have to pay fines on a further 30-plus properties.
