Landlord penalty quashed after council fails to meet six-month rule

A firm has warned that minor licensing mistakes can cost landlords thousands of pounds after successfully overturning a £19,500 financial penalty.

London Property Licensing reveals it advised on a case in which a housing officer from Waltham Forest Council inspected a flat and found it was being rented to three friends without the correct licence, in breach of the council’s additional HMO licensing scheme.

The firm is now warning landlords and letting agents that, under the Renters’ Rights Act, financial penalties could be even higher.

Council took 17 months to process the application

London Property Licensing explains that the case was not as straightforward as first imagined.

London Property Licensing said the flat on Lea Bridge Road in east London had previously been occupied by a single household before being re-let to three sharers in July 2023.

The firm said the landlord had submitted an additional HMO licence application in 2021 and appointed a managing agent to oversee compliance.

However, the council took 17 months to process the application and, during that time, the property changed from being occupied by three sharers to a single family. As a result, the application was refused because it was no longer the correct type of licence.

After the family moved out and the property underwent refurbishment, it was re-let to three sharers. At that point, a new licence application was required, but this was missed due to an administrative oversight by the managing agent.

A council inspection two months later identified the licensing breach, but neither the landlord nor the managing agent was informed at the time.

Six months later, Waltham Forest Council issued a notice of intent to impose a £19,500 penalty. According to the firm, the notice was not received by the landlord, and a final penalty of £15,600 was issued six months later.

Issued notice outside six-month limit

London Property Licensing points out that, while the appeal raised concerns about both the decision to impose a penalty and the level of the fine, it also questioned whether the notice of intent had been issued within the required timeframe.

The legislation says: “The notice of intent must be given before the end of the period of six months beginning with the first day on which the authority has sufficient evidence of the conduct to which the financial penalty relates.”

On appeal, the First-tier Tribunal found that Waltham Forest Council had issued the notice outside this statutory six-month limit and therefore cancelled the penalty.

The council attempted to challenge the decision, but its appeal was unsuccessful. The Upper Tribunal upheld the ruling, confirming that the statutory time limit had been misapplied.

High penalties are often imposed for minor indiscretions

Richard Tacagni, managing director at, London Property Licensing, warns small administrative oversights can cost landlords and letting agents thousands of pounds.

He said: “This case demonstrates how the civil financial penalty regime is becoming ever more complex and litigious. High penalties are often imposed for minor indiscretions without any prior warning.

“With new statutory guidance supporting even higher financial penalties under the Renters Rights Act, I’m concerned the regulatory model is out of balance. We need better and more proportionate regulation of the private rented sector.”

The news comes as landlords and letting agents in London now face a greater financial risk from licensing breaches, with council fines moving close to £25 million.