Today's most viewed
| NEWS |  | | | | | | AFC WIMBLEDON | | | CRYSTAL PALACE NEWS | | | | COMPETITIONS | | | | | | ON THIS DAY | | | BIZARRE LONDON | | | | |
|
|
|
'Death-trap bedsit' brothers fined over £10k
 |
| The lack of working smoke alarms was one of the many problems with the pair's bedsits |
Two brothers who rented out "death-trap bedsits" to people in Tooting have been fined £10,400 after being taken to court by Wandsworth Council.
Sajid and Shakil Ismail, from Graham Avenue, Mitcham, were prosecuted for providing poor and dangerous standards of accommodation to the tenants living in their five bedsits. One resident was living there with her three-month-old baby.
Council officials who inspected the property in Thrale Road, Tooting, discovered dangerous electrical wiring, exposed cables and broken plug sockets.
Fire escape routes were obstructed by unwanted furniture and building materials, there were no fire safety doors and smoke alarms were not working properly. These deficiencies were deemed to be serious because the bedsits were situated above a fast food takeway.
The fire and safety hazards were first noted in March 2006 following a tip-off to environmental health officers, who carried out an immediate inspection of the property.
The brothers ignored repeated warning letters from the council that safety standards had to be improved. They also ignored formal improvement notices requiring the works to be carried out.
| "This was a very serious case of neglect by these landlords. The property was in a terrible state of disrepair and little short of a death trap." | | Councillor Martin D Johnson |
|
As a result the two men appeared before magistrates and both pleaded guilty to four offences under The Housing Act 2004 and the Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006.
The brothers were ordered to pay a total of £10,400 in fines and legal costs.
Wandsworth Council's executive member for housing, Councillor Martin D Johnson, said: "This was a very serious case of neglect by these landlords. The property was in a terrible state of disrepair and little short of a death trap.
"The exposed wires, loose cables, broken plugs were all serious fire hazards, and if a fire had broken out, the lack of functioning smoke alarms, the absence of fire retardant doors and the blocked fire escapes could have had tragic consequences.
"If you are a landlord you have certain duties and responsibilities to your tenants. Taking rent from them in exchange for shoddy and dangerous accommodation is not acceptable."
Landlords or tenants needing advice on safety issues can contact environmental services on 020 8871 6127.
7:17pm Wednesday 21st May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Pete, Surbiton on 7:40pm Wed 21 May 08
£10,400? Hmm. It's now May 2008, and the problem was first flagged up in March 2006 - that's 26 months. Bedsits in that area seem to go for around £260pcm, and they've got five of them.
So, by my reckoning, they've probably pulled in £46,800 of rent during that time.
So a fine of £10,400 is hardly what you'd call a deterrent!
Okay so I haven't considered their costs here, but I think it's fair to say the cost per unit isn't high when you split up a small flat above a shop into even smaller bedsits. And this is especially true if you aren't bothering to maintain it and keep it safe.
I see that Rachmanism is alive and well today.
£10,400? Hmm. It's now May 2008, and the problem was first flagged up in March 2006 - that's 26 months. Bedsits in that area seem to go for around £260pcm, and they've got five of them.
So, by my reckoning, they've probably pulled in £46,800 of rent during that time.
So a fine of £10,400 is hardly what you'd call a deterrent!
Okay so I haven't considered their costs here, but I think it's fair to say the cost per unit isn't high when you split up a small flat above a shop into even smaller bedsits. And this is especially true if you aren't bothering to maintain it and keep it safe.
I see that Rachmanism is alive and well today.
Posted by: Jock, London on 2:53am Thu 22 May 08
I remember such people when I first moved to London.
But such people are small fry when you think about the legitimate letting agencies who fleece hundreds of thousands of pounds a month from, and don't give a toss about tenants in London. I pay £500 to them every 6 months, but next time they're in for a shock. Not sure what for, and get resistance when asking for an itemised bill. But! As soon as I have a problem which is an agency problem, they don't want to know.
I remember such people when I first moved to London.
But such people are small fry when you think about the legitimate letting agencies who fleece hundreds of thousands of pounds a month from, and don't give a toss about tenants in London. I pay £500 to them every 6 months, but next time they're in for a shock. Not sure what for, and get resistance when asking for an itemised bill. But! As soon as I have a problem which is an agency problem, they don't want to know.
Posted by: Pete, Surbiton on 3:17pm Thu 22 May 08
Yeah, I agree with Jock about lettings agencies. In particular, I notice that Foxtons continues to fail to be a member of ARLA.
Foxtons do have membership of other associations, but these are more about protecting landlords' and homeowners' rights rather than tenants' rights. I understand that ARLA is the organisation that you need your lettings agency to be a member of if you're a tenant.
Another sharp practice to watch out for is what's known in the industry as the "Sword of Damocles"; - this is where a landlord, or letting agency, gives you your notice requiring possession immediately upon you signing your tenancy agreement, and getting you to sign to confirm receipt of it, whilst trying to play down its significance; they say it's needed "for insurance reasons". But what it means is that you don't effectively have any right to notice of eviction, since the notice has already been served.
Surprisingly, this practice is still not illegal. There's more about it in a sticky thread on the housepricecrash.co.u
k "All About Renting" forum.
Yeah, I agree with Jock about lettings agencies. In particular, I notice that Foxtons continues to fail to be a member of ARLA.
Foxtons do have membership of other associations, but these are more about protecting landlords' and homeowners' rights rather than tenants' rights. I understand that ARLA is the organisation that you need your lettings agency to be a member of if you're a tenant.
Another sharp practice to watch out for is what's known in the industry as the "Sword of Damocles"; - this is where a landlord, or letting agency, gives you your notice requiring possession immediately upon you signing your tenancy agreement, and getting you to sign to confirm receipt of it, whilst trying to play down its significance; they say it's needed "for insurance reasons". But what it means is that you don't effectively have any right to notice of eviction, since the notice has already been served.
Surprisingly, this practice is still not illegal. There's more about it in a sticky thread on the housepricecrash.co.u
k "All About Renting" forum.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
