Wolverhampton landlady agrees ban with court on letting properties
Undertakings are voluntary legal commitments made to the court and fall under recent changes to the Digital Marketing, Competition and Consumer Act 2024.The council said the landlady, who manages 36 properties across the city, accepted she and the company had made an unlawful threat to evict a tenant, who was living in a property with her young baby.She also demanded rent that was not owed and misled the public by failing to include details of the business on official stationery, according to the authority.Ms Saddique accepted that she had done, or was likely to do, something considered unfair or harmful to consumers and agreed to not let housing in England, engage in letting agency work, engage in property management work or hold a house in multiple occupation licence, with agreed exceptions.Tenants currently living in properties managed by her will remain in their homes and the properties will be managed by other letting agents.
'Untrustworthy person'
Councillor Bhupinder Gakhal, cabinet member for resident services, said it was a "terrible case" of a tenant and her young family being "hounded" by someone they should have been able to trust."Most importantly, it has seen an unscrupulous and untrustworthy person removed from the letting and rental sector."Councillor Steve Evans, deputy leader of the council and cabinet member for city housing, said there was a "growing trend" of unfair practices by landlords and the council would use the new powers where applicable.
Follow BBC Wolverhampton & Black Country on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Finextra
17 minutes ago
- Finextra
Barclays follows HSBC out of the Net Zero Banking Alliance
Barclays has followed HSBC in withdrawing from the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), claiming that the departure of a host of other global lenders means the organisation "no longer has the membership to support our transition". 1 Founded in 2021, the UN-convened NZBA requires members to commit to "transition the operational and attributable greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their lending and investment portfolios to align with pathways to net-zero by 2050 or sooner". At its peak it had around 150 members, including most of the world's largest banks. However, that number has dwindled in the last few months. At the beginning of 2025, ahead of Donald Trump's return to the White House, a host of US banks, including JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo, pulled out of the global climate-focused alliance. The American banks quit amid attacks from Republicans on "woke" capitalism, with the House Judiciary Committee, led by Republican Jim Jordan, claiming that financial environmental alliances have created "a climate cartel". Now, UK-headquartered HSBC and Barclays have joined their US counterparts. Barclays says it is committed to its "ambition" to be a net zero bank by 2050. Says a statement: "Our targets to mobilise $1 trillion of Sustainable and Transition Financing and for financed emissions remain unchanged. We continue to work with our clients on their transition, finance the transition and scale climate tech, while helping to ensure energy security for our customers and clients." Earlier this week, the CEO of Standard Chartered, Bill Winters, hit out at banks that have rowed back on their climate commitments. 'People that said a lot of stuff, but [when] it was fashionable to say it, [and] who are saying either nothing or the opposite now: shame on them,' said Winters, according to the Guardian.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man, 76, charged with child cruelty offences over summer camp
A 76-year-old man has been charged with child cruelty offences after children became unwell at a summer camp in Leicestershire. Leicestershire Police said it received a report on Sunday that children at a summer camp at Stathern Lodge in Canal Lane, Stathern, had become unwell. Eight children, all boys aged between eight and 11, and an adult, who were taken to hospital as a precaution, have all since been discharged. Jonathon Ruben, of Landmere Lane, Ruddington, Nottingham, will be charged with three counts of wilful ill treatment relating to three boys at the summer camp between July 25 and July 29, the Crown Prosecution Service said on Friday. He was remanded into custody and will appear at Leicester Magistrates' Court on Saturday. Leicestershire Police has referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) over its handling of the incident. The force originally said the incident happened on Monday, before amending it to Sunday, and it is still unclear whether officers only responded on Monday, and whether that is why the force has referred itself to the IOPC. Janine McKinney, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said: 'The Crown Prosecution Service has authorised the prosecution of a 76-year-old man with child cruelty offences following a police investigation into a summer camp held at Stathern Lodge, Leicestershire. 'This decision has been made after reviewing a file of evidence from Leicestershire Police. 'Jonathon Ruben will be charged with three offences of wilful ill treatment of a child relating to three boys. 'This has been an extremely upsetting and shocking moment for the community, and especially for the children and parents most directly affected. 'We would like to remind all concerned that there are now active criminal proceedings against Mr Ruben, and he has the right to a fair trial. 'There must be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online that may in any way prejudice these proceedings.' Leicestershire Police said the 'owners and operators of Stathern Lodge are independent from those people who use or hire the lodge and are not connected to the incident'. The IOPC said: 'Our assessment team has examined all available evidence and concluded the matter should be independently investigated by the IOPC. 'The investigation will look at whether there were any breaches of professional behaviour – namely a failure to carry out duties and responsibilities – that resulted in a delay in Leicestershire Police's response to what was later declared a critical incident.'
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Drivers should be ‘very pessimistic' over car finance claims, say lawyers
Drivers should be 'very pessimistic' about getting any compensation for taking out a car loan after a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court, experts have warned. Industry analysts also said on Friday that banks will 'breathe a sigh of relief' after the Supreme Court ruled they are not liable for hidden commission payments in car finance schemes. Nevertheless, the financial watchdog has said it is still considering whether to launch a redress scheme for consumers who potentially receive compensation. Lawyers have also indicated that some consumers should still consider pursuing their claims over 'unfair' treatment. Two lenders, FirstRand Bank and Close Brothers, went to the UK's highest court to challenge a Court of Appeal ruling which found 'secret' commission payments paid by buyers to car dealers in agreements before 2021 without the motorist's fully informed consent were unlawful. The ruling last year found three motorists, who all bought their cars before 2021, should receive compensation. But in a decision on Friday, justices at the UK's highest court overturned the Court of Appeal, though some customers could still receive payouts by bringing claims under the Consumer Credit Act (CCA). Lawyers for the lenders told the Supreme Court at a three-day hearing in April the decision was an 'egregious error', while the Financial Conduct Authority intervened in the case and claimed the ruling 'goes too far'. However, the judges upheld a claim brought by one driver under the CCA that his relationship with the finance company had been 'unfair', awarding him the commission amount of £1,650.95 plus interest. Lizzy Comley, chief operating officer of consumer law firm Slater and Gordon, said the ruling still reinforces the right of many consumers to pursue claims. She said: 'This landmark ruling is positive news for the millions of people who have lost money due to the car finance mis-selling. 'The court confirmed that for years, consumers have potentially been unfairly overcharged on car finance agreements, and this ruling reinforces their right to pursue justice and recover the compensation they deserve.' However, others have said that the ruling will make it harder for most claims. Nicola Pangbourne, partner at Kennedys law firm, said: 'If I was a driver, I would be very pessimistic about getting compensation. There's now quite a few hurdles they've got to get through.' Industry experts have suggested the ruling will be broadly seen as a success for lenders, who had been preparing for significant compensation payments. Caroline Wayman, global head of financial Services at PA Consulting, said: 'Lenders will breathe a sigh of relief at the ruling, but it should still be a wake-up call for firms to scrutinise any large, undisclosed commissions in their business. 'Firms should ask themselves whether it still feels justifiable or could be considered unfair, particularly if they haven't disclosed commercial ties to the broker and it won't be enough to expect customers to have read and understood the fine print.' On Friday, a spokesperson for the Financial Conduct Authority said after the ruling that it would confirm whether it will consult on any such scheme by 8am on Monday. They said: 'We want to bring greater certainty for consumers, firms and investors as quickly as possible.'
