Property boss fined after Bradford student flats left without central heating or hot water
Two student blocks were cut off in 2021 after bills weren't paid
A PROPERTY boss whose refusal to pay a gas bill left dozens of tenants at a student flats building without central heating or hot water for several weeks has been fined just £360.
The fine came at the end of a court case that has lasted years, cost Bradford Council thousands of pounds to prosecute and has led to 14 separate court listings.
Bhupinder Chohan, 58, had the responsibility of managing two apartment buildings at Laisteridge Student Village, near the University of Bradford in 2021.
In April of that year the gas to the two buildings, All Saints Hall and Trinity B, was cut off by the utilities company due to the non-payment of a bill.
Bradford Council heard that the properties were without gas on April 15, meaning residents were unable to use central heating, gas cookers or hot water.
Trinity B had 79 bedrooms and All Saints Hall had 88 bedrooms, although not all these were occupied at the time.
When Council officers contacted the utility company they said the gas had been cut off due to a non-payment of bills.
Letters were sent to Hill and Standard – the property company listed as owning the halls and later to B&M Properties 1. Chohan, of Middlebrook Way, had links to both companies, and was also sent a letter.
It ordered him to restore the gas supply.
In early May Chohan responded to say “cash flow problems” meant he couldn’t pay the gas bill.
He said the utility company had dismissed plans to pay the bill gradually, and that the company was in the process of selling the two buildings to a new owner.
By May 13 the gas supply had still not been restored.
At that time 27 people were living in Trinity B and 49 people in All Saints Hall.
Chohan had been issued numerous notices ordering him to restore the gas.
He has since been prosecuted and pleaded guilty to failing to comply with these orders.
He appeared at Bradford Magistrates Court on Friday to be sentenced.
Claire Walsh, prosecuting on behalf of Bradford Council, said: “Both premises required maintenance – there was damp exacerbated by the lack of heating.”
Chohan later told he Council that he had begun to move tenants into another building, but that some tenants did not want to move.
He told the Council he had no major role in the company other than managing the properties.
Mrs Walsh told the court that the role of the two companies in running the buildings “appeared confused” and that Chohan’s role “seems unclear.”
The saga dragged on for much of the Summer, and Chohan was issued with a prohibition order demanding he reinstate the gas in the property.
By late September 2021 both buildings were vacant, but the gas supply had not been reinstated.
The court was told that even when there was no gas in the building, Chohan was instructing staff to find new tenants, who would be offered a 50 per cent discount due to the property having no heating or hot water.
The business was later wound up, and a member of staff saw Chohan on CCTV collecting cash and documents from a safe before the administrators were called in.
Mrs Walsh said: “He continued taking rent from tenants despite providing accommodation with no heating and no hot water. Staff were encouraged to take new tenants despite the gas being disconnected.”
Pointing out that tenants were without gas for weeks, she said: “He should have prioritised this issue that was brought about by his own mismanagement.
“He just attempted to buy more time rather than meet the needs of his tenants. He said he was short on funds despite plenty of tenants still paying rent.”
Dr John Brown, defending, said the issue went back to the Covid pandemic – a time when it was made illegal to evict tenants, even if they were in arrears.
He said some tenants refused to pay rent, putting the properties in a troubling financial position.
Referring to the lack of gas, he said the electric was still working, and people would be able to shower in a different student block.
He said Chohan made clear to new tenants that there was no gas, adding: “He was not trying to hoodwink people.”
Referring to his clients refusal to pay the bills, he said: “Maybe he shouldn’t have paid his employees and put that money towards the utilities. He felt the gas issue was lower down the pecking order.
Recorder Green, hearing the case, said: “You were a man of previous good character. You are not now because you have pleaded guilty to this offence of conniving in breach of obligations placed on you.
“This was reckless as you knew what was going on but chose to bury your head in the sand.”
The court was told that both B&M Properties and Chohan had been declared bankrupt earlier this year, and was currently penniless.
Recorder Green asked Dr Brown how Chohan was able to survive with no income.
He said he lived with his elderly mother, and relied on handouts from his brother.
He had struggled to find a job since he was made bankrupt, and was not on benefits.
When asked why he was not claiming benefits, Dr Brown said it was down to pride.
The court heard that the only sentence suitable for the charge was a fine based on Chohan’s income.
However, with him being penniless and due to start on benefits, the Court could only consider the weekly Universal Credit payment of £120.
Legan guidance said any fine should be three times Chohan’s weekly salary, so the fine would amount to just £360.