Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Applicant, Mr Naveed Hussain (now Navid Shabir), was found responsible for housing offences at 249 & 251 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield, involving breaches of Regulations 4, 7, and 8 of the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006. The Tribunal confirmed high culpability due to his history of non-compliance, systematic failures, and control over the properties despite delegating management to his brother, Mr Hussain. Harm was adjusted to low after remedial work was completed. Financial penalties of £7,500 were imposed for each breach, totaling £45,000.
Issues
- Initially assessed as medium for Regulations 4 and 7, the Tribunal revised the harm level to low for all breaches after confirming the Properties were brought up to satisfactory standards. The Council's original assessment of low harm for Regulation 8 was upheld, with the Tribunal noting that remedial work reduced the risk to tenants.
- The Tribunal determined that the Applicant's culpability for breaches of Regulations 4, 7, and 8 remained high despite his claims of ignorance and delegation of management to his brother. The Applicant argued he was unaware of issues due to relocation and community service, but the Tribunal found his explanations implausible and accepted the Council's assessment of high culpability.
Holdings
- Breach of Regulation 8 at 249 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield - Financial penalty of £7500 confirmed.
- Breach of Management Regulation 4 at 251 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield - Financial penalty of £7500 confirmed.
- Breach of Management Regulation 4 at 249 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield - Financial penalty of £7500 confirmed.
- Breach of Management Regulation 5 at 249 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield - Financial penalty of £7500 confirmed.
- Breach of Regulation 8 at 251 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield - Financial penalty of £7500 confirmed.
- Breach of Management Regulation 7 at 251 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield - Financial penalty of £7500 confirmed.
Remedies
- Financial penalty of £7500 for breach of Management Regulation 5 at 249 Pitsmoor Road, amended from the original £15000 penalty. The Applicant is required to pay the penalty within 28 days of receiving the decision.
- Financial penalty of £7500 for breach of Management Regulation 4 at 249 Pitsmoor Road, amended from the original £15000 penalty. The Applicant is required to pay the penalty within 28 days of receiving the decision.
- Financial penalty of £7500 for breach of Regulation 8 at 251 Pitsmoor Road. The penalty remains unchanged from the original assessment. The Applicant is required to pay the penalty within 28 days of receiving the decision.
- Financial penalty of £7500 for breach of Regulation 8 at 249 Pitsmoor Road. The penalty remains unchanged from the original assessment. The Applicant is required to pay the penalty within 28 days of receiving the decision.
- Financial penalty of £7500 for breach of Management Regulation 7 at 251 Pitsmoor Road, amended from the original £15000 penalty. The Applicant is required to pay the penalty within 28 days of receiving the decision.
- Financial penalty of £7500 for breach of Management Regulation 4 at 251 Pitsmoor Road, amended from the original £15000 penalty. The Applicant is required to pay the penalty within 28 days of receiving the decision.
Monetary Damages
45000.00
Legal Principles
The Tribunal applied the principle of burden of proof, determining that the Applicant failed to provide credible evidence to reduce culpability from high to medium or low. The Applicant's arguments regarding lack of knowledge and reliance on his brother's management were not accepted, as the Tribunal found the Council's evidence (including the Applicant's registered proprietor status and failure to respond to notices) sufficient to maintain high culpability.
Cited Statute
- Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006
- Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976
- Housing Act 2004
Judge Name
J. E. Oliver
Passage Text
- The Tribunal determines culpability for all the breaches remains high. When taking into account the Guidelines relied upon by the Council and the reasons given for culpability, the Applicant has not given any credible reasons why that should be lowered to either medium or low.
- The Tribunal finds harm for all of all breaches is now low. The accommodation is now satisfactory any likelihood of harm to the tenants must now be reduced.
- The Tribunal noted there was no dispute the Applicant had committed the housing offences by reason of the breaches of Regulations 4, 7 and 8. It was accepted the Applicant is the manager of the Properties and had received the relevant Notices relating to the housing offences. He did not dispute his culpability for the offences.