Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Warham Road illegal conversion: rogue landlord fined
From the Haringey Council Website:
While I applaud the council for taking this bloke to court, getting the news out that a landlord has been pursued and fined through the courts for flouting the law so blatantly and naming and shaming him,I have to say £3000 is not a hefty fine. He probably made that in a week of rent from the illegal flats. The law is still on the side of the landlords.
"A landlord who illegally converted a Haringey house into four flats and rented them out has been fined £3,000.
Costas Charalambous, of Maida Vale, London, W9, was also ordered to pay £1,780 in costs by Haringey magistrates.
He purchased the property in Warham Road, N4, in 2007 for £400,000 and spent a great deal of money converting it into flats.
He pleaded guilty to failing to comply with an enforcement notice under Section 179 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
He did not have planning permission to convert the property into flats. He unsuccessfully appealed against that decision, but still put
tenants in the property. He rented flats out for 10 weeks from May to
August last year.
When making its decision, the court is entitled to take into account the money the landlord made in renting the property out."
While I applaud the council for taking this bloke to court, getting the news out that a landlord has been pursued and fined through the courts for flouting the law so blatantly and naming and shaming him,I have to say £3000 is not a hefty fine. He probably made that in a week of rent from the illegal flats. The law is still on the side of the landlords.
Tags for Forum Posts: hmos
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
Michael - why not just phone Planning Enforcement and get the name of the officer responsible and ask? There is sometimes a disconnect because the enforcement case is initially brought by Planning Enforcement, but when it then proceeds to a prosecution (because the notice is not complied with), it goes off to the litigation team. In my case (re 54 Effingham), it took a year before the litigation team launched the prosecution. But it sounds like you may just need to start harrassing Enforcement to go and visit the property and stay on top of this. As I (and others) have posted repeatedly, Enforcement are hopelessly under-staffed and unless you constantly prod them, you will not get results. But if you do prod them, you will get there in the end.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
A great start. I hope it will start getting the message out and make landlords think twice. However, the Council must see this as JUST a beginning.
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Hatch on
-
I am going to stick my neck out professionally and say let’s hope there are more of these to come. The very fact that the local community are so vigilant and active on this front puts public feeling under the spotlight, which also helps flag up the issue for Haringey Council, or even forces them to deal with it to a degree.
Yes the area needs landlords, but we need responsible ones. At the risk of repeating myself on this issue, and stating the obvious… the area needs a healthy balance, and as many of us are aware, the current balance has been far from healthy, for far too long! So let’s hope this is the first of many.
Perhaps if any/all rent obtained from an unlawful property were made to be paid back, (instead of just being taken into consideration by the court on a discretionary basis) it may help prevent this absurd and all too familiar pattern.
At least this sends a clear message out, and it is a message I certainly plan to echo as I go about my business.
-
Permalink Reply by lizz riley on
-
So fined 3k? what a joke.
I too am pretty sure it is 119, I saw the work taking place, i am surprised however that it was only 4 flats. So, what happens now, he has been fined a paltry amount and has been told to convert back to a single dwelling? Doubt that's going to happen. It is such a shame that so many properties are being ruined by these greedy so and so's. I live very close to that property and although a lot of money may have been spent on the conversion the front garden looks a sorry state and i doubt anyone will be doing anything about it.
By the way, are we to believe it is empty now and does anyone know what has become of 108 Warham road?
-
Permalink Reply by Protheroe O'Shea on
-
He will have certain timescale to re-convert it back to it's original state, If not the council with do it themselves and charge him the costs.
Lets not forget that he brought a deralict property for £400,000 spent a lot on a new roof and redeveloped inside at quite a cost. He will now have to re-convert at another great cost.
In todays current climate he is set to lose big money if he tries reselling. The estate agents will not be able to offer it as an HMO and will have legal obligation to notify customers that it is an illegal conversion so he cant sell it to a developer. he will be unable to get a good rental value as a whole house. So I gues his only hope is to rent it out to temporary housing as a family home thus giving something back to the comminity he tried so hard take from.
Yes the fine was paltry and a disgrce, but he is still very much out of pocket. the residents of Warham road who tried so hard to get this selfish twat busted are having the last laugh.
-
-
Fantastic news, very happy that either way he is a loser...ha ha ha!
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Brilliant news.
I too would have liked a little more info on the man concerned. Find it very telling that few of these landlords ever actually live in the area they are having such a terrible impact upon. Maida Vale eh, dodgy landlords clearly doing as well as ever they did ...
-
-
The Magistrates Court does not have the statutory power to impose a custodial sentence for the offence. Only a Crown Court does.
-
-
THE LATEST NEWS:
The rogue landlord has been so scarred by his "hefty fine" that he has decided to. . . er, apply to convert the premises back into 2 flats (remember it was previously a single house!). That means he is desparate to do anything to avoid converting it back to a single property. It also means (I think) that by having a current planning application on the go, he avoids any enforcement action moving forward while this application is decided (and, no doubt, appealed). So at least another 6-8 months of inaction on the enforcement front - and probably also more rent for the landlord.
View the application here.
If Nilgun or any of the councillors are reading, I'd welcome their views on whether the enforcement has been effectively stalled for another 6-8 months.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
