An estate agent who failed to apply for a licence for Rachel Reeves to let her family home was not responsible for the oversight, his boss has revealed.
The property manager has found himself at the centre of a political scandal after he originally dealt with the Chancellor’s case.
But questions were raised about why the agent had left the company abruptly without fulfilling the licence requirement.
Gareth Martin – owner of Harvey & Wheeler, which managed Ms Reeves’ property – has now defended his former employee and said he had resigned after being offered a new job.
Mr Martin said his firm had offered to help the Chancellor because she was ‘high-profile’, adding that it was ‘unfortunate’ that his employee had left the business.
It came as Ms Reeves faced fresh questions last night after The Mail on Sunday revealed she had been warned by a second firm of estate agents that she needed the documentation to let her family home in Dulwich, south-east London.
Last week, the Daily Mail revealed she had broken housing law by letting the four-bedroom property for £3,200 a month without a rental licence after moving to Downing Street following Labour’s General Election victory.
Southwark Council requires landlords in the area to obtain ‘selective’ licences, but the local authority have said they won’t fine her over the breach.
Rachel Reeves faced fresh questions last night after she was warned by a second firm of estate agents that she needed the documentation to let her family home in Dulwich
While Ms Reeves initially said she was unaware of the requirements, she later backtracked and published emails showing that her agents Harvey & Wheeler had volunteered to obtain the licence.
However, they failed to do so and later released a statement taking responsibility for the oversight.
Nevertheless, obtaining the licence is the responsibility of the homeowner – failing to get one is a criminal offence and can be punished with a fine of £30,000.
Ms Reeves’ tenants could still demand she pays back a year’s rent, which would cost her £38,000.
Speaking publicly for the first time, Mr Martin said yesterday: ‘There is absolutely no criticism of any member of staff. The previous property manager was very good. I take full responsibility for the mistake. It was just unfortunate timing… an innocent mistake.
‘We were trying to help. It is really unfortunate. When you get a high-profile client you want to help them.’ Further doubt was cast on Ms Reeves’ initial claim that she was unaware of the need for a licence to let her home by yesterday’s Mail on Sunday.
It revealed how she had approached a second estate agent, Knight Frank, about managing the detached property and that they also warned her she would need to apply for a licence. A spokesman for Knight Frank said: ‘It is standard procedure to notify all clients of their legal and regulatory obligations when letting a property.’
Following the news, the Conservatives called for a fresh investigation into whether the Chancellor had been aware of the rules.
Questions: The Chancellor charged £3,200 a month in rent for her four-bed family home despite failing to obtain a licence legally required to let out the property
Tory Treasury minister Gareth Davies said: ‘Each day brings fresh questions about Rachel Reeves’ account. This latest revelation casts serious doubt on her claim not to have known about the need for a licence.
‘Her story seems to shift with every explanation. The Prime Minister must now get to the bottom of this and order a full investigation without delay.’ Last week, Ms Reeves finally applied for the correct licence after an embarrassing exchange with Keir Starmer in which she at first insisted she had no knowledge of the need for a licence.
She then published an email exchange between Harvey & Wheeler and her husband Nick Joicey, a senior civil servant who is on secondment, in which they discussed the licence.
Her failure to produce a full account initially prompted a rebuke from Sir Keir, who said it would have been better for Ms Reeves to have trawled through the emails before writing to him.
Nevertheless, he concluded that she had acted in ‘good faith’, while the independent adviser on ministerial standards Sir Laurie Magnus said she had committed an ‘inadvertent error’.
This judgment spared the Prime Minister the desperate humiliation of having to sack his Chancellor less than a month before she is due to deliver the Autumn Budget.
Ms Reeves’ spokesman said: ‘You have the conclusion of Laurie Magnus, and the exchange of letters from October 30 where Rachel Reeves references correspondence from Harvey & Wheeler that says a selective licence would be required’.
