x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button

TODAY'S OTHER NEWS

Landlord fined £177,000 for putting tenants at risk

A neglectful landlord, who allowed his tenants to occupy a property without working smoke alarms, a lack of sufficient fire doors and an external escape route that was in a poor state of repair, even after repeated warnings from the local council, has been fined £177,000 for serious breaches of fire safety regulations.

Philip Anthony Brotherton, the owner of Cresctcourt Properties Ltd, accepted that he put the lives of his tenants at risk by not having sufficient fire safety measures in place when he appeared before Reading Magistrates' Court.

Brotherton pleaded guilty to four charges under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.

Officers from Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service found a number of serious issues, including various failings, when they inspected a property in Waylen Street, Reading, occupied as a house of multiple occupation.

Assistant Chief Fire Officer, Simon Jefferies, said: “Our priority is to ensure the safety of the people of Berkshire. We will always work with landlords to maintain fire safety standards in premises and prosecution is the last resort.

“However, we hope that the significant level of this fine will send a clear message to all property owners that they have a duty to keep our communities safe and if they put anyone at risk by breaking the law, we won’t hesitate to prosecute.”

  • icon

    So,.... How was this Prosecution the 'Last Resort ' as described by the fire service, - Was the landlord given any warning, guidance or instruction that he failed to comply with ?

  • icon

    how much of the fine goes to fire service? did anyone suffer? was escape not functional? how was £177000 arrived at? how many afos in berkshire?

    icon

    None, I believe. All Magistrates courts fines go to the Treasury ( the Govt. at the end of the day - as they pay for the Justice system ) so to be fair, I don't think that was a 'driver' in this case.
    You would have expected inline with the fire service statement and legal option ( especially as there had been No fire, ) to have been the last or much subsequent resort.
    The reason I enquire, is that some Landlords ignore initial warnings, and if that is the case, its not unreasonable to expect escalated action.
    I was just enquiring IF, that was the position in this case ?

     
  • icon

    not sure but councils get cut of penalties

icon

Please login to comment

Zero Deposit Zero Deposit Zero Deposit
sign up