Claim 12 months rent if your Landlord failed to comply regarding licenced rentals.

UnsureAboutthis

Around London, in recent years, councils have begun to get landlords to pay a lot
of money to get a licence before they can rent out a property.

Failing to get property rental licenses is in the news; last night, we were discussing this.

I looked up a London Borough's website, and this is what they say, see below.

(I strongly recommend you look up your local council's website and find out if the property
you are renting, which needs a licence, and if so, check that it has one. (IIRC,
the landlord is supposed to put up a licence in the property, but check)

I hope the thread helps someone get some money back if they are renting a
property which did not meet the requirements set out by the local council.

From the website:

Unlicensed properties

You may be able to apply for a rent repayment order if:

• you're a tenant of an unlicensed property
• you've lived in an unlicensed property in the past 12 months

This order allows you to recover up to 12 months of your rent back from your landlord.

We work closely with Justice for Tenants. These are a not-for-profit tenant's rights organisation.

They can help with your rent repayment order application.

Email southwarkrro@justicefortenants.org to find out more. 

They aim to reply within 1 working day.

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/housing/private-tenants-and-landlords/private-rented-property-licensing/unlicensed-properties

BELOW is a list from Google's A1, ie coucils that require a licence for non-HMOs as well.

(It can be wrong, so check.)

Several London boroughs require a license to rent out a property that is not a house in multiple occupation (HMO), though the specific areas vary by borough. Examples include parts of Brent (all wards except Wembley Park), Greenwich (specific wards like Woolwich Riverside), Lambeth (most wards, excluding Vauxhall, Waterloo, and South Bank), Newham (all wards except Royal Victoria and Stratford Olympic Park), and Bexley (Belvedere Ward). These are typically called selective licensing schemes and apply to properties rented to a single household or two individuals. 

Examples of boroughs with selective licensing for non-HMO properties

• Brent: Requires a license for most properties rented to a single household, two people, or a single person, in all wards except Wembley Park.
• Greenwich: Requires a license in specific wards for single-household properties, including Woolwich Riverside, Woolwich Common, Shooters Hill, Plumstead Common, and Plumstead Glyndon.
• Lambeth: Requires a license in most wards, with selective licensing schemes in effect in many areas like Brixton, Clapham, and Streatham. The Vauxhall, Waterloo, and South Bank wards are excluded.
• Newham: Requires a license for most privately rented properties in all wards, with the exception of Royal Victoria and Stratford Olympic Park.
• Bexley: Has a selective licensing scheme for the Belvedere Ward, which began on January 13, 2025.
• Westminster: Requires a license for properties rented to a single household, a single tenant, or two individuals sharing.
• Barnet: Has selective licensing schemes that are being phased in, covering areas like Burnt Oak, Colindale North, and Colindale South.
• Barking and Dagenham: Also uses selective licensing to ensure quality and safety in private rented homes. 

...

flaneurs_lobster

Ah, the Reeves Bounty.

Fill yer boots.

Albermarle

It probably depends if the property was actually substandard/ not eligible for a license.

If it is just an admin error ala the Chancellor then less of a case I guess.

ThorOdinson

Looks like AI slop.

theartfullodger

Quite right landlords should be "encouraged" by fines to comply with the law.  

Let's be frank, there's been a very long history of landlords ripping off innocent tenants.

fyi I'm a landlord, had lodger in 1980s (£10 a week, been there since the war..) and then landlord in Scotland and England starting 2000. (Never been fined or found guilty as a landlord: other areas I prefer not to say).

However there are (England) over 100 Acts or regulations governing landlord/tenant matters.  I suspect very few landlords don't breach something 


Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

UnsureAboutthis

theartfullodger said:

Quite right landlords should be "encouraged" by fines to comply with the law.  

Let's be frank, there's been a very long history of landlords ripping off innocent tenants.

fyi I'm a landlord, had lodger in 1980s (£10 a week, been there since the war..) and then landlord in Scotland and England starting 2000. (Never been fined or found guilty as a landlord: other areas I prefer not to say).

However there are (England) over 100 Acts or regulations governing landlord/tenant matters.  I suspect very few landlords don't breach something 


Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

"innit" just.
Just like life, you have to take responsibility. It is no good crying after being caught out
and saying  x/y and z was going to do the license/etc/etc.  Even stuff
like paying for a service/insurance/etc, having paid, I always ensure that the money has been
taken from my account, ie make double certain.
Many landlords are very good, but there will always be some who are not.

I guess some landlords will learn the hard way when a tenant demands the return of 12 months' rent.

Jumblebumble

UnsureAboutthis said:

theartfullodger said:

Quite right landlords should be "encouraged" by fines to comply with the law.  

Let's be frank, there's been a very long history of landlords ripping off innocent tenants.

fyi I'm a landlord, had lodger in 1980s (£10 a week, been there since the war..) and then landlord in Scotland and England starting 2000. (Never been fined or found guilty as a landlord: other areas I prefer not to say).

However there are (England) over 100 Acts or regulations governing landlord/tenant matters.  I suspect very few landlords don't breach something 


Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

"innit" just.
Just like life, you have to take responsibility. It is no good crying after being caught out
and saying  x/y and z was going to do the license/etc/etc.  Even stuff
like paying for a service/insurance/etc, having paid, I always ensure that the money has been
taken from my account, ie make double certain.
Many landlords are very good, but there will always be some who are not.

I guess some landlords will learn the hard way when a tenant demands the return of 12 months' rent.

Fortunately it is  UP TO 12 months and a tribunal may well award much less

UnsureAboutthis

Jumblebumble said:

UnsureAboutthis said:

theartfullodger said:

Quite right landlords should be "encouraged" by fines to comply with the law.  

Let's be frank, there's been a very long history of landlords ripping off innocent tenants.

fyi I'm a landlord, had lodger in 1980s (£10 a week, been there since the war..) and then landlord in Scotland and England starting 2000. (Never been fined or found guilty as a landlord: other areas I prefer not to say).

However there are (England) over 100 Acts or regulations governing landlord/tenant matters.  I suspect very few landlords don't breach something 


Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

"innit" just.
Just like life, you have to take responsibility. It is no good crying after being caught out
and saying  x/y and z was going to do the license/etc/etc.  Even stuff
like paying for a service/insurance/etc, having paid, I always ensure that the money has been
taken from my account, ie make double certain.
Many landlords are very good, but there will always be some who are not.

I guess some landlords will learn the hard way when a tenant demands the return of 12 months' rent.

Fortunately it is  UP TO 12 months and a tribunal may well award much less

Yes, but still worth trying. FYI, I'm a landlord and do everything by the book. 
ATM, our rental does not require a licence but it's a money
making machine for the coucils, so it will happen.

Grumpy_chap

theartfullodger said:

Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

Except, of course, the licensing is a new rule and a new cost brought in after a good proportion of current LLs started.

However well intentioned, the licencing has a cost and the costs of doing business invariably eventually fall to the customers to pay.

WIAWSNB

UnsureAboutthis said:

Jumblebumble said:

UnsureAboutthis said:

theartfullodger said:

Quite right landlords should be "encouraged" by fines to comply with the law.  

Let's be frank, there's been a very long history of landlords ripping off innocent tenants.

fyi I'm a landlord, had lodger in 1980s (£10 a week, been there since the war..) and then landlord in Scotland and England starting 2000. (Never been fined or found guilty as a landlord: other areas I prefer not to say).

However there are (England) over 100 Acts or regulations governing landlord/tenant matters.  I suspect very few landlords don't breach something 


Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

"innit" just.
Just like life, you have to take responsibility. It is no good crying after being caught out
and saying  x/y and z was going to do the license/etc/etc.  Even stuff
like paying for a service/insurance/etc, having paid, I always ensure that the money has been
taken from my account, ie make double certain.
Many landlords are very good, but there will always be some who are not.

I guess some landlords will learn the hard way when a tenant demands the return of 12 months' rent.

Fortunately it is  UP TO 12 months and a tribunal may well award much less

Yes, but still worth trying. FYI, I'm a landlord and do everything by the book. 
ATM, our rental does not require a licence but it's a money
making machine for the coucils, so it will happen.

How would you know about such changes?

theartfullodger

Grumpy_chap said:

theartfullodger said:

Simple rule for any business you get into.  If you don't like the rules don't start.

Innit.

Best wishes to all 

Except, of course, the licensing is a new rule and a new cost brought in after a good proportion of current LLs started.

However well intentioned, the licencing has a cost and the costs of doing business invariably eventually fall to the customers to pay.

Came in years ago in Scotland (cheap, free online to allow tenants to check) .  That England dragged feet yet again and cost more is daft. 

In the overall cost of being a landlord it's cheap.  Anything helping boot out the illegal sharks has got to be good.

Anyone going into any business area banking on their never being any legal changes would be thought by many to have scored an own goal.

The pendulum has swung in favour of tenants/landlords for as long as I can remember, financial, market and legislative changes.  (I'm 77).  What did you or anyone else expect?

When interest rates dropped, how many landlords dropped their prices? And when rates went up how many didn't increase rents?

Best regards to all