Tribunal overturns £19,500 HMO fine as council failed to issue it in time

  • london
  • June 25, 2026
  • Comments Off on Tribunal overturns £19,500 HMO fine as council failed to issue it in time
Tribunal overturns £19,500 HMO fine as council failed to issue it in time thumbnail

The council mailed the landlord a fine of £19,000 for operating the HMO without a licence on 20 March 2024

PA

Waltham Forest Council’s attempt to fine the operator of an unlawful House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) more than £15,000 fell through, as it failed to issue it in time.

Council officers inspected the Lea Bridge Road property in September 2023, where they found three tenants had been living there for two months. It had previously been occupied by a single family. The management had not applied for a new HMO licence.

Legal firm London Property Licensing, which worked with the landlord at tribunal hearings, attributed this to administrative oversight.

Six months later, on 20 March 2024, the council mailed the landlord a fine of £19,000 for operating the HMO without a licence.

Despite being sent by first class post, the landlord did not receive it. A further six months on, the council issued a final penalty of £15,600, which the landlord challenged.

The judge’s decision in the intricate case was down to the timing of when the council posted the first fine.

Authorities are required, by law, to issue a notice of intent within six months of the day they have “sufficient evidence”.

The First-Tier tribunal ruled that to be the day the officers visited, and not the following day as the council argued, and as a result Waltham Forest was too late. The letter would have arrived on 22nd March – two days late.

At the Upper Tribunal hearing, judge Neil Cadwallader found the council had misinterpreted the time limit for serving a notice of intent and dismissed its appeal.

The council says it is weighing up taking the case further on, to the Court of Appeal, where the ruling could be overturned.

A spokesperson told the Local Democracy Reporting Service it was “considering [its] options following this ruling with a view to taking our case to the Court of Appeal”.