A London landlord has been ordered to repay his tenants nearly £10,000 in rent following a Property Tribunal hearing.

Rosemede Homes Ltd, which has a single director Abraham Rosenberg, must repay the money to the firm’s two tenants who lived at the firm’s property on Bacon Street in Shoreditch, East London (main picture).

The tenants entered into an Assured Shorthold Tenancy agreement at the beginning of September last year paying a rent of £2,500 per month.

But they complained soon after moving in that the property was excessively cold because a window was defective and the heating ineffective, but the landlord made no attempt to improve the situation although the Tribunal noted that the property had an ‘adequate’ EPC certificate.

The tenants then contacted Tower Hamlets council and discovered that the property should have had a licence under its Selective Licencing scheme introduced a year before, and applied for a Rent Repayment Order.

Licence

During the hearing in front of Judge D Brandler, Rosemede’s counsel said admitted failing to apply for a licence, but asked the Tribunal to “look favourably upon them because they admit that they should have licenced the property”, he said.

“They ask the Tribunal to note that they permitted the applicants to end their occupation of the property early without penalty.”

There were several allegations made during the hearing, including that staff at Rosemede Homes had threatened one of the tenants on several occasions, while the firm’s staff claimed one of the tenants made racist remarks over the phone, an allegation rejected by the Tribunal as ‘fabricated’. Judge Brandler said he had found that the tenants "did not demonstrate poor conduct" during their time at the property, although their claims of excessive cold at the property were not proven duw to lack of evidence.

The Tribunal reports that Mr Rosenberg, who gave evidence in person, was “at times confused, at times evasive and at times contradictory”.

Rosemede Homes must now pay the tenants £4,871 each but the firm refused leave to pay in instalments after the Tribunal noted firm’s accounts showed a cash at the bank of £29,266 and assets of £5.8 million.

Read the judgement in full.