London based company fined more than £53,833 for allowing TJs building to fall into disrepair
Posted on Thursday 6th July 2017
The London based company which owns the former TJs nightclub in Clarence Place has been successfully prosecuted by Newport City Council for allowing the building to fall into disrepair.
The company, 121 Ventures, who own the building and its directors and company secretary were together ordered to pay more than £53,833 in fines and court costs following the hearing at Newport Magistrates Court (July 2).
The case was brought by Newport City Council in relation to a prosecution for non-compliance with a Listed Building enforcement notice and Section 215 notice (unsightly land) at the former TJs building.
The company 121 Ventures Limited was fined £25,000 for the listed building offence; £1,000 which is the maximum fine for the Section 215 notice, a victim surcharge of £170 and ordered to pay the council’s costs of £1493.95, bringing a total of £27,663.95 to be paid by 28 July 2017.
Omar Saleem Aslam, a director and company secretary was fined £25,000 for the listed building offence, £1,000, maximum fine for the Section 215 notice and a victim surcharge of £170, totalling costs and fines of £26,170 to be paid by 28 July 2017.
Another director Mohammed Iqbal Hussain failed to appear at court and a warrant was issued for his arrest.
The court was told this building is very well known in Newport but it has been vacant for a considerable period of time and its appearance is deteriorating.
There are two notices which have not been complied with. The Listed Building Enforcement Notice required the defendants to repair and reinstate or replace missing or damaged red clay roof tiles on the front and rear and repair and reinstate or replace missing damaged lead flashing.
The Section 215 Notice required the defendants to repair or reinstate the missing and broken glazing at the property, remove all vegetation from the front and rear façade and remove all resulting debris from the land; remove vegetation from the roof and repair the cornice above the fascia on the front.
The court was told the defendants failed to carry out any remedial works on this iconic building and have shown complete disregard of council notices and court proceedings by their non-attendance at previous hearings.
They also failed to meet with officers on several occasions to discuss the state of the building.