The client faced First-tier Tribunal proceedings after receiving a notice deeming their property unsuitable for vulnerable tenants. The property was found to have multiple deficiencies, including fundamental design flaws that compromised its suitability for such occupation.
The client was subject to First-tier Tribunal proceedings following service of a notice deeming their property unsuitable for occupation by vulnerable tenants. Upon consultation, it was established that the property suffered from multiple deficiencies, the most significant being its inherent design limitations which rendered it unfit for such use.
Given the client’s intention to continue letting the property, Counsel advised that a Hazard Awareness Notice should be sought in respect of those issues capable of remediation. However, Counsel noted that substantial structural concerns—particularly relating to the roof and fenestration—posed significant obstacles to compliance. In light of this, it was recommended that the hearing be adjourned to allow time for remedial works to be undertaken. Counsel further advised that, absent an Improvement Notice, any substantive defence was likely to fail.
The client faced First-tier Tribunal proceedings after receiving a notice deeming their property unsuitable for vulnerable tenants. The property was found to have multiple deficiencies, including fundamental design flaws that compromised its suitability for such occupation.
The client was subject to First-tier Tribunal proceedings following service of a notice deeming their property unsuitable for occupation by vulnerable tenants. Upon consultation, it was established that the property suffered from multiple deficiencies, the most significant being its inherent design limitations which rendered it unfit for such use.
Given the client’s intention to continue letting the property, Counsel advised that a Hazard Awareness Notice should be sought in respect of those issues capable of remediation. However, Counsel noted that substantial structural concerns—particularly relating to the roof and fenestration—posed significant obstacles to compliance. In light of this, it was recommended that the hearing be adjourned to allow time for remedial works to be undertaken. Counsel further advised that, absent an Improvement Notice, any substantive defence was likely to fail.
Call us – Mon-Fri 8:30am – 6:30pm
+44 (0) 20 3034 0077
By submitting this form, I accept this website’s Privacy Policy