[2024] UKUT 00300 (LC)

The appellant, Mr Deane, challenges the refusal of the First-tier Tribunal, Property Chamber (the FTT) to reinstate his appeal against a financial penalty of £7,500 imposed on him by the respondent, the London Borough of Newham (the Council), after his appeal had been struck out for failure to comply with the FTT’s procedural directions. The penalty was imposed under Section 249A, Housing Act 2004 (the 2004 Act) which permits a local housing authority to impose a financial penalty where it is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a person’s conduct amounts to a relevant housing offence.

Mr Deane was accused by the Council of the offence under section 72, 2004 Act, of having control of or managing an unlicensed HMO, at 86A Hatherley Gardens, East Ham. Mr Deane’s defence to that accusation is that he has nothing whatever to do with 86A Hatherley Gardens, whether as owner or manager, and that the Council’s information to the contrary is the result of a mistake by a property agent.

The appeal, for which permission was given by this Tribunal, has proceeded on the basis of the parties’ written representations.