Leading housing experts have called out legal firms who say they are authorised to carry out regulated eviction litigation activities when they are not.
This follows a recent court case during which Sasha Charles, 31, (pictured) was given a suspended sentence for what the Westminster Magistrates Court judge called a ‘deliberate, planned and sophisticated’ deception.
District Judge Paul Goldspring told Charles: “You are sentenced for the carrying out of regulated activities, regulated by the Legal Services act 2007 which, unless you are registered and under the umbrella or regulatory bodies that police such activities, you are not entitled to do so”.
Charles is a director of Landlord Advice UK Limited, records at Companies House show, which shares the same registered address as the British Landlords Association (BLA). It also links from its website to the eviction company's site, recommending it as one of its ‘specialists’.
BLA chairman Sajjad Ahmad tells LandlordZONE that his organisation uses a panel of eviction providers offering their services to both commercial property and private rented sector members, and that Charles is no longer involved in the running of any firm recommended by the BLA.
“The BLA is an ethical organisation and our directors are all Christians and pastors of churches, which not many people know, and therefore we are committed to a moral duty to conduct business ethically,” he adds.
Charles came to the attention of the authorities after being reported for acting in civil disputes without proper authorisation including referring to himself as the ‘claimant’s solicitor’ during litigation between 10th July 2019 and April 2023, reports Court News UK. He also self-describes himself as a ‘lawyer’ within his Companies House filings.
The justice system views the false representation of legal powers dimly, and Judge Goldspring said in court: “It is a very serious matter when an individual makes a representation – whether overtly or covertly – that he is a solicitor and acts as one when in truth that is entirely bogus.”
In mitigation, the judge added: “You weren’t negligent and no client or any particular individual were out of pocket”.
On that basis, and also taking into account claims by Charles that he had been ‘coerced’ into the business by his family and had ADHD, was given six months’ in prison suspended for two years and was required to complete 100 hours of unpaid work and 15 rehabilitation activity requirement sessions. His company was fined £12,000 while he must pay costs of £3,000.
After the case against Charles came to light, several high-profile figures have warned landlords against using firms who claim to be authorised to carry out regulated activities including evictions when they are not, and have highlighted early warning signs they saw concerning Charles' activities.
Giles Peaker of Nearly Legal has published a post saying he had a 2018 run-in with Sasha Charles on Twitter/X during which Peaker questioned his housing expertise, as well as "ringing alarm bells about whether he was crossing the line into carrying out regulated activities”.
David Smith (pictured) of Spector, Constant & Williams, says: “There are a fair few ‘tenant eviction specialists’ out there.
“They say that solicitors are too expensive, and they can do the job cheaper. But what they don't tell you is that they are cheaper because they have no insurance, no redress scheme, no training obligations, and no qualifications at all.
“For some possession cases that will not really matter. But if things get more complicated, they are likely to cause more problems than they solve.”
Paul Shamplina, founder of Landlord Action, which is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), says: “We are celebrating 25 years of serving landlords and I and my former partner Jonathan started the fixed-fee, three step eviction process
“But this opened the doors inadvertently to an industry of unregulated companies which some landlords are attracted to because they offer cheaper evictions.
“I took the decision to turn Landlord Action into a regulated firm of solicitors because I wanted to separate it from these unregulated companies.
“When it comes to unregulated operators, there needs to be more redress, and more importantly the SRA needs to take more enforcement, so that landlords understand the difference between regulated and unregulated providers, and the risks which come with the latter.
“The risks will become much larger after the Renters’ Rights Bill goes live and the eviction process becomes more difficult after Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions are abolished.”
Tags:
Comments