A Nottingham landlord claims he is facing potential fines of up to £30,000 after the city council ‘washed its hands’ of a vulnerable tenant it originally placed in his property nearly two decades ago. The case raises questions about the balance between enforcement action and council responsibility for tenants they refer to the private rented sector.
Council-placed tenant since 2007
Mick Roberts, described as the largest landlord of benefit tenants in Nottingham, says the tenant was referred to him by Nottingham City Council in 2007. The tenant, now 70, is living with cancer, uses a wheelchair and has other health problems. The property in Bulwell has become heavily cluttered, with extensive garden waste and damage to boundary fencing.
Roberts says he does not blame the tenant for the property’s condition. Instead, he argues the council failed to ensure appropriate support was in place. “I’m not a social worker, not a counsellor, not a council worker,” he said. “I housed him on the council’s say so.”
Licensing and enforcement demands mount
The landlord says he is now facing pressure on multiple fronts. Licensing officers are pursuing him for a property licence at a cost of £890, warning that failure to comply could expose him to fines of up to £30,000 under housing enforcement powers. At the same time, community protection officers have issued instructions requiring the garden to be cleared and fencing repaired by a set deadline – damage caused by the tenant.
Roberts and a prospective buyer have already cleared some of the rubbish, but more work is required. He claims the council has ‘absolved themselves of all responsibility’ for a tenant they originally referred. “And yes, you’ve guessed it – it’s the landlord’s fault the house is like this,” he said. “For a tenant the council asked me to house!”
A familiar tension for PRS landlords
The case highlights a tension many landlords housing council-referred tenants will recognise. While landlords are held responsible for property conditions under licensing and enforcement regimes, they have limited control over tenant behaviour and often receive minimal ongoing support from referring authorities. Councils face their own pressures, but landlords argue that enforcement-first approaches fail to acknowledge the complexities of housing vulnerable tenants.
Roberts stresses he does not blame the tenant: “He’s 70 and needed help. He didn’t get the correct help. But that’s OK, the landlord will sort it.” Nottingham City Council has been approached for comment but had not responded at the time of publication.
Editor’s view
This case exposes an uncomfortable reality of selective licensing enforcement. Councils cannot have it both ways – asking landlords to house vulnerable tenants while providing no ongoing support, then issuing fines when things go wrong. If local authorities want private landlords to be part of the housing solution, they need to share the burden, not just the blame.
Author: Editorial Team – UK landlord & buy-to-let news, policy, and finance
Published: 24 February 2026
Sources: Mick Roberts, Nottingham City Council
Related reading: Councils face double jeopardy claims over licensing penalties
