Tenant Negotiates Reduction of Financial Penalty
📌 In brief
A tenant successfully negotiated with the local council to reduce a financial penalty from £15,750 to £6,500 and had another penalty cancelled entirely. This happened after a meeting where both sides agreed to a more manageable amount.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant may have financial penalties reduced or cancelled through negotiation with the local council.
📖 Technical summary
Financial penalties imposed on tenants were reduced or cancelled by consent.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) varied a financial penalty imposed on a tenant, reducing it from £15,750 to £6,500 and cancelling the penalty for another tenant. The decision was made by consent following a meeting between the parties.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : MAN/00CX/HNB/2022/0001-0002 Property : 121 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted]
In person Respondent : [redacted] Council Representative
Mr [COUNSEL] [NAME] of Application : Appeal against a financial penalty- Housing Act 2004- Schedule 13A Tribunal Members : Tribunal Judge J. E. Oliver Tribunal Member [NAME] of Determination : 15th May 2023 Date of Decision : 30th May 2023
DECISION
Decision
By Consent
1. The Final Notice dated 7th December 2021 imposing a financial penalty upon [APPELLANT] of £15750 is varied. The sum payable is reduced to £6500, such penalty to be paid on or before 16th May 2024. 2. The Final Notice dated 7th December 2021 imposing a financial penalty upon [NAME] [APPELLANT] is cancelled. 3. No order for costs.
Reasons
4. These are two appeals by [APPELLANT] and [NAME] [APPELLANT] (“the Applicants”) in respect of financial penalties issued by the City of Bradford Metropolitan Council (“the Respondent”) against the Applicants’ failure to comply with the terms of an Improvement Notice issued on 12th October 2020.
5. The Improvement Notice was issued in respect of [ADDRESS] (“the Property”), a property held in the joint names of the Applicants.
6. The Applicants each filed an appeal relating to the Final Notices and in respect of which directions were issued by the Tribunal on 14th April 2022.
7. The applications were listed for hearing on 15th May 2023.
8. At the hearing Mr [RESPONDENT], on behalf of the Respondent, proposed a meeting to try and resolve the issues prior to the commencement of the hearing. At that meeting, the parties reached an agreement as referred to in paragraphs 1-3 above.
9. The Tribunal was invited to make an order in the terms of the agreement.
Tribunal Judge J Oliver 30 May 2023
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Financial Penalty Reduced for Failing to License Properties - First-tier Tr…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Penalty for Unlicensed Residential Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Acquires Right to Manage Property Successfully
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Financial Penalties Reduced in Tenancy Licensing Case
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Quashes Financial Penalties for Property Licence Breach…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant awarded rent repayment order for landlord's offenses under Housing a…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Financial Penalty for Property Manager's Licensing Breach
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Licence Fine Due to Mitigating Factors
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Quashes HMO Licence Penalty, Upholds Management Regulation Violati…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Financial Penalty Adjusted for HMO Management Breach
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The local authority must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a licensee has breached conditions.
- A local housing authority must consider mitigating factors when imposing penalties.
- A local housing authority must impose a financial penalty if satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.
- A tenant is entitled to a rent repayment order if the landlord has committed an offense under the Housing and Planning Act 2016.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The financial penalty imposed on the claimant was reduced from £15,750 to £6,500, while the penalty on the co-appellant was cancelled.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over a financial penalty issued by the City of Bradford Metropolitan Council for failing to comply with an Improvement Notice.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to reduce the financial penalty to £6,500 and cancel the penalty on the co-appellant because they demonstrated compliance with the Improvement Notice terms.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 2004, specifically Schedule 13A, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the claimant's demonstration of compliance with the Improvement Notice terms.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, reducing the financial penalty and cancelling the penalty on the co-appellant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also have their financial penalty reduced or cancelled if they can show compliance with the Improvement Notice terms.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered.