When Councils Get It Wrong: Two Recent Landlord Victories You Should Know About
Every landlord has heard stories about heavy-handed enforcement. It is much rarer to see clear, documented wins where a council decision is overturned or criticised. The two cases below show it does happen. Both are recent, both are credible, and both contain practical lessons for the rest of us.
Case One: Ombudsman raps council over eviction advice
Sefton Council was criticised by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman for giving a tenant incorrect advice about staying put during an eviction process. The Ombudsman found that the council failed to consider whether it was reasonable for the tenant to remain and that delays and poor handling led to unnecessary legal and bailiff costs for the landlord. Read the summary via LandlordZONE here: landlord wins legal fight over council’s poor eviction advice.
Why it matters: if an authority gives misleading guidance, it can escalate conflict and increase costs. This ruling reinforces the principle that councils must handle homelessness and eviction cases correctly, and that landlords can seek redress when poor advice causes loss.
Case Two: HMO penalty overturned on the facts
A Cornish landlord successfully appealed an HMO licence penalty after disputing the number of occupants. The case turned on evidence about who actually lived at the property. Coverage here: “rare” legal victory over incorrect HMO classification, and a legal write-up with additional detail here: Local Government Lawyer.
Why it matters: HMO penalties are not automatic. They depend on facts that can be tested. If the evidence does not support the alleged number of occupants, penalties can be overturned.
Practical takeaways for landlords
- Keep a clean paper trail. Tenancy schedules, inspection notes, and correspondence timelines can be decisive when facts are disputed.
- Challenge inaccurate decisions promptly. Use the council’s complaint route, then the Ombudsman or tribunal where appropriate.
- Focus on evidence, not emotion. Headcounts, occupancy proof, and dates carry more weight than opinion.
Your experience
Have you won an appeal or had a penalty withdrawn, or do you feel a council has treated you unfairly?
Please share the facts below.
Specifics help other readers, and your comments may guide future content.
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since July 2016 - Comments: 166
6:33 AM, 19th August 2025, About 8 months ago
I had a HMO selective license awarded then withdrawn by a large West Midlands council because, according to the Council, my lease prohibited renting to sharers. I disputed the interpretation of the wording in the lease and the license was reinstated ‘pending further investigation by their legal department’. This was nearly 2 years ago. I have heard nothing further so I assume this has been quietly dropped.
Member Since November 2022 - Comments: 66
5:39 PM, 24th August 2025, About 8 months ago
I won a case against The Royal Greenwich Communist Council in 2024 where the proximate cause was that our tenant was unlawfully granted by them emergency housing on the lie that our property was “a danger to her life”.
Upon the lovely tenant absconding from our property without notice, but leaving ALL her belongings, including white goods and large furnishings, in the property, we were sent a bill by the Communists to pay the Communist Tax.
I challenged it, they basically ignored me.
They sent some comrade down to the property illegally without notice and she forced her way into the flat under false pretences past my builder and declared the flat empty without even doing a full inspection.
I complained about the trespass, but of course the Communists believe they know better and continued to harass me with notices.
I started proceedings at the FTT and had the communists withdraw their summons pending that hearing. Then some commy a few months later sent me another final notice threatening me with a summons. I didn’t restrain myself on commenting on how absurd that was in light of the FTT action.
At the FTT the Royal Greenwich Communist Council’s representative provided irrelevant case law and when I had my opportunity to cross examine her she could not tell the court by what means, or what date the alleged ex-tenant had notified the council of her vacation of the property.
Then by some revelation she said “the housing department told us”. Upon my declaration that this was hearsay the judge realised this was going to get further embarrassing for the commy and so he interjected, ending the cross examining early but recognised my point.
So here we have a tenant who unlawfully and fraudulently declared our property “uninhabitable”, and a communist housing department unlawfully permitting this fraud and illegally taking her on into emergency housing, and said department then illegally representing the tenant by falsely acting as her attorney in telling the commy tax department that she had vacated the property.
The whole debacle was based upon the commy tax department stating that the tenant had no “material interest” in the property. Which besides the fact that they were misquoting the legal definition of material interest from the bla bla Act, she had not in anyway legally vacated her tenancy.
Basically said lovely tenant just wanted somewhere to store all her belongings while she manipulated the council into finding her another property.
I wonder if the commies actually then put notice on her to pay the tax. Somehow I doubt it.