A landlord, his property firms and two letting agents have been told they must pay fines totalling £105,300 for renting out unlicensed properties.

A First Tier Property Tribunal rejected Asad Chaudhary’s appeal against six test cases selected from 78 appeals. Chaudhary, a prominent landlord in London’s East End, and the director of Zas Ventures Ltd and Interface Properties Ltd, had objected to Waltham Forest Council’s licensing scheme. It heard that the landlord had told both Marlborough and Let’s Move not to pay the financial penalties, and that he would pay their penalties if the appeals were unsuccessful.

It was only after the council said it would apply to obtain interim management orders in respect of 33 properties that he finally applied for licences for those properties in October 2024.

Chaudhary had argued in 2023 that it was unlawful for the council to demand a £700 fee for a five-year licence when its second scheme would expire on 30th April 2025. He considered that the threat of management orders was, in effect, blackmail to force him to do so. In 2025 most of the penalties were reduced, either from £19,500 to £15,600, or from £15,600 to £11,700.

Companies

He said the companies and/or letting agents were in control/management of the properties and therefore bound to apply for the licence. The letting agents argued there was an express term in the management agreement requiring Chaudhary, Zas or Interface to obtain/maintain the necessary licence, so that the agents were not in management/control. Other reasons given were that two of the flats were vacant.

The judge ruled that there was no statutory limitation on the ability of a local authority to grant a licence for a period of (no longer than) five years, regardless of the outstanding life of the designation.

Excuse

He added that neither of the agents had established a reasonable excuse and that firms should be expected to make active checks on the licensing position of properties.

The judge said in the landlord’s evidence, even when he made entirely proper concessions, Chaudhary sought to place the blame on the respondent, his employees, and anyone else available.

Course

“We find that he pursued a course of aggression and deflection, prolonging their renewal as long as possible, and only obtained the licences because otherwise the respondent would seek management orders, despite knowing that the companies/agents were operating Part 3 houses unlawfully without them.”

The fines imposed were: 764b Lea Bridge Road, £15,600 (Zas Ventures Limited and Let’s Move Properties Limited); Flat 4, 266 – 268 High Road, £15,600 (Asad Chaudhary and Interface Properties Limited) and £19,500 (Marlborough Homes Limited); Flat 6, 479a High Road, £15,600 (Asad Chaudhary and Zas Ventures Limited); Flat 7, 479a High Road, £15,600 (Asad Chaudhary and Zas Ventures Limited); Flat C, 56 St Mary Road, £11,700 (Asad Chaudhary, Interface Properties Limited and Let’s Move Properties Limited) and 15 Exeter Road (pictured), £11,700 (Asad Chaudhary and Interface Properties Limited).

Photo: Google Streetview

‍