HT-2022-000311 & HT-2022-000254 - [2024] EWHC 3179 (TCC)

This is the flat of Armand Sablon who gave evidence. Mr Sablon lives in Hong Kong and for him the flat is an investment and a source of rental income. After the water ingress, his tenants vacated the flat and he was unable to rent the flat out again, losing rental income and he was liable to pay council tax, and utility bills on an uninhabitable flat.

His claimed losses amounted to £50,049.93 in respect of lost rental income and £3,095.97 for council tax and utilities both of which Mr Daly found to be substantiated.

Mr Sablon had remedial works carried out and had been able to rent the flat out again since 28 April 2023. He described the remedial works as a lick of paint, at a cost of £4,800. Although there was no documentary evidence for that figure, it is a reasonable sum which I award.

It was, in effect, put to Mr Sablon that he had failed to mitigate his losses as he could have undertaken decorative repairs earlier. His response was that he was aware that there were issues about the safety of the building and he held on as long as possible because he did not want something to happen for which he would be liable. I have considerable sympathy with this position, particularly as he was living abroad and I do not find that he failed to mitigate his loss. I, therefore, award the sums claimed for loss of rent, council tax and utilities.

Mr Sablon’s claim also includes sums that fall within the interior works claim and are accounted for above. In an exhibit to his statement, he claimed over £51k in respect of legal fees which are not recoverable as damages. In the same exhibit, he claimed £20k for distress and inconvenience although in the table of losses that is said to be unquantified. In closing submissions, Mr Levenstein suggested a more modest figure of £1,000. However, given that Mr Sablon did not and does not live in the property, I cannot see that he has any basis on which to claim such damages.

In cross-examination, Mr Sablon was also asked about access for Click St Andrews. His evidence was that he had given his keys to Mr Bacon and told Laith Mubarak of Click St Andrews that he could get the keys from Mr Bacon. As far as he was aware, he had not restricted access.