A landlord has been slapped with a whopping £50,808 Rent Repayment Order after admitting he had failed to license his inadequate HMO for six years.

Seven former tenants will share the pay-out following the case brought by Justice for Tenants at a First Tier Property Tribunal which heard that landlord Paul Banks had let out the house in a condition which would not have been illegible for a licence.

Banks, a professional landlord of 35 years who owns seven other rental properties in London and Somerset, admitted he knew the property potentially needed a licence from 2015.

However, he was surprised to find that the requirements differed from borough to borough and that he needed to install extra kitchen equipment for the property in York Rise, Camden.

Extension delays

Banks explained that this meant the kitchen needed an extension which could only be done when a neighbour had completed his own extension, and he then had to wait for planning permission.

Work was eventually carried out during the winter months and in lockdown when tenants were left without any cooking facilities or adequate heating. Building materials stored in the communal living room prevented it from being used.

The court said it was particularly concerned by Banks’ admission that he had left asbestos waste from another property in the front garden and had effectively called upon one of the tenants to dispose of it for him. It also noted that he had a previous conviction for a similar HMO offence.

It ruled that the tenants were required to endure unacceptable living conditions and awarded them each the maximum amount of 12 months’ rent. The tenants accepted that they had been given a rent discount during the worst of the building works but had taken this into account when calculating their respective claims.

Read more about Rent Repayment Orders.


  1. Google Doctor Paul (paz) Banks and you’ll find he’s been fined several times.

    The Law needs to remove this type of Landlord from owning any rental properties, not simply issue fines.

  2. This is why a cheap National LL Licensing scheme should be introduced.

    No more than £100 per property every 5 years with the same cost for the LL licence.

    No letting to be permitted unless licensed.

    Any person letting without a licence to face a RRO of all the rent received while letting without a licence.

    Get rid of all the corrupt licensing schemes.

    LL who illegally let without a licence should be banned for 5 years from letting.

    The way to hit rogue LL is in their pocket.

    Any LL letting without a licence would lose all their proceeds if they are discovered.

    Criminals won’t bother if the rent is recovered from them.

    Of course a licence should not be granted where a LL is breaching lender and insurance conditions.

    That will cause about 2 million homeless tenants.
    Which is why there will never be a stringent LL licensing process asking the correct questions.

  3. They are really talking the Mick out of LL’s now, repayment Orders should be banned, those former Tenants had use of the Property and at its facilities.
    They were happy to take the property as it was and if the Tenants wanted a licensed Property why didn’t they rent one.
    First Tier Tribunal is sometimes made up of ex council employees.

    • Yep, who needs fire safety measures like a fire alarm – “if tenants want basic health and safety – they should rent a property with basic health and safety.”
      “If tenants don’t want to live in a slum…they should just live somewhere else.”

      Great arguments – very persuasive!

      RROs are designed and intended to teach landlords respect for the basic requirements of licensing. They appear to be working excepting various apologists in the comments on stories like this.

      Good landlord – nothing to worry about.

  4. I am in the dark as to know if income tax was paid on the letting we are never told this and will it be returned or has the tax being taken on illegal income.

    • Sounds like nonsense – tax depends on the LL circumstance (with many properties almost certainly) & who would HMRC return the tax to? The landlord or the tenant? The tenant has had their rent back and the landlord certainly wouldn’t expect any tax rebate following his crime – it is meant to be a punishment!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here