A pair of landlords are facing a five figure legal bill after their tenant took them to court over damp.
Alfred Haagman, who owns Neville Investments Ltd, and Alessandro Nettuno, appeared at Brighton Magistrates Court today in connection with a complaint made by tenant Shaun Capon.
Mr Capon was not in court but was represented by Meezabin Motegheria from no-win, no-fee legal firm Antony Hodari.
The complaint was for an order to abate damp and mould at a flat in Upper Lewes Road owned by Haagman.
Ms Motegheria told the court the problem had now been fixed – but that a trial was still needed as the defendants said the damp had not been caused by them, but by Mr Capon.
She asked for the trial to be listed in front of a district judge to decide who was liable for the damp – and therefore who should pay her firm’s costs, which were already approaching £10,000.
Once a barrister and experts have been instructed for the trial, the final figure will be in the low five figures.
Haagman was not represented, but addressed the court himself to ask for a way to resolve the issue without any further hearings.
He said: “I’ve been a landlord for 45 years and never had any issues. The work has been done.
“The tenant has said he doesn’t want to proceed with this case.
“This is a no win, no fee case. The costs are ridiculously overcharged.
“We have got evidence that the tenant had blocked up the ventilation. We have a video from when my contractor went round which shows clothes blocking up the vents.”
The court heard Nettuno was currently abroad, but was in correspondence with Ms Motegheria via email.
The case was listed for a one-day trial on 19 January in front of district judge Tessa Szagun.
I heard Neville Investments Ltd was divesting of all of the low grade housing stock…. this might give impetus to unload the shabby slums.
I wonder if council tenants in similar situations could do this?
So the tenant does not wish to proceed. The landlord says the matter has been sorted. The only party who wishes to draw this out is the no win no fee parasite in whose interests it is to draw the matter out escalating fees. The legal profession is an overcrowded one with ambulance chasers making a slimy living out of what they call getting justice.
Yep, legal profession is full of disgusting overcharging parasites. All self governing and look after their own interests with the pretence of defending justice.
If the claim fails, could the solicitor be deemed a vexatious litigant? Public money should not be wasted by this further clogging up the system. The costs should be deducted from any settlement. I feel that the costs have been extremely overstated to the point that it brings the profession of solicitor into disrepute. Prima facie, a fee of about £1000 would seem appropriate in this case.
Not surprising on Upper Lewes Road. Probably the worst road in Brighton, tonnes of graffiti and neglected housing. One of Brighton’s biggest problems is these landlords who are charging massive rents but invested very little in the buildings.
It looks like the only party pushing this are the no-win-no-fee solicitors. I presume they feel that the costs will either go to the landlords (if they were proved to be at fault) or the tenants (if they have caused, as the landlords appear to have evidence for). I suggest these groups get legal advice promptly – they could be liable for large costs and they need to establish if these costs are reasonable (and indeed if there is any liability on the legal firm, courts have decided against them too). The tenant could lose a lot of money – in other cases tenants have thought they have nothing to lose as fees paid win or lose. But there are other costs potentially and some have had tens of thousands against them.
Ridiculous case!
This is quite an interesting moment in time here.
Brighton housing – especially in central areas – is mostly built from bungaroosh, and the damp issues in these Victorian properties are notorious.
Built in an age when no-one knew to add a damp course, the lower floors often have rising damp and the key is to ventilate the property with open windows. In the old days, the ventilation came as draughts through sash windows and through gaps in the floor boards.
Insulation and double gazing has only made these properties worse, by containing the rising damp.
If you now add to this mix a rental property, where the tenants are probably paying most of their income in rent, on household bills, and council charges, the first thing they do to save money is to limit the heating. And then they’ll try and dry their washing indoors, rather than to dry it in a vented tumble dryer or at a launderette.
So it’s then no wonder that the inside of a rented house in Hanover or on the Lewes Road is damp. When the damp gets bad the mould soon appears on the walls.
Is this then the landlord’s fault? Or is it down to the low-income lifestyle of the tenants?
The last thing we want to solve this perennial issue is for ‘no-win-no-fee’ legal vultures bringing cases like these.
Spot on!
Very well said sir. The “report” actually states the landlords contractor noted blocked (by the tenant) ventilation. The tenant themselves should be liable.
we have an experienced impartial team in Brighton council housing services. They can diagnose issues like this and get landlords/tenants to make changes to fix. There is no need to use compensation-chasing lawyers. The council service is free to tenants. As with any council service may take some chasing to get it, but they know what they are doing and when I was a tenant they were very helpful.
I recently had a tenant complain about mould showing on an interior wall.
I had a chartered surveyor visit and he noted that the problem was caused by wet washing on racks everywhere, dozens of houseplants and the refusal of tenant to open windows because of a phobia of ‘ creepy crawleys’ !
The end result was an eviction and now a new more responsible tenant. If they had been taken on by a no fee solicitor the costs for myself would have been ruinous!
You would have costs against you if you lost. However, with a surveyors report backing up that you aren’t to blame then these costs could go to the tenants. Unfortunately for some tenants, they have lost in this type of case and faced huge bills. They thought that there was no risk to them (no win, no fee) but that’s only your own lawyer and not other costs.
Seeking legal action is risky for tenants as well as landlords. Can be tens of thousands or more. Best for tenants and landlords to work together or, where this is not possible, call in the council’s private housing team. I’ve had good experiences with them in Brighton and they work to find a solution not to earn billable hours!
As I understand it , there are new laws and guidances being introduced very shortly , these deem that any landlords has to ensure that there is adequate ventilation/heating in place and is compliant before any discussions about tenants behaviour living choices ( such as drying clothes , over population of property by both humans and animals).