header-logo header-logo

29 June 2012 / Jon Holbrook
Issue: 7520 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property , Housing
printer mail-detail

In a fix?

75461397_fmt_4

In the first of two articles, Jon Holbrook considers the new local authority flexible tenancy scheme

“It is no longer right that the government should require every social tenancy to be for life.” So said the Housing Minister, Grant Shapps MP, in November 2010, in a consultation document on the future of social housing. Eighteen months later the Localism Act 2011 (LA 2011) came into force to enable local authority landlords to grant flexible tenancies which, unlike the existing periodic secure tenancy, will give the landlord a mandatory right of possession. The flexible tenancy need only be for a minimum period of two years.

Fixed-term tenancies should, if local authorities and housing associations grant them, have a profound effect on the sector. The government has made clear its objective of ensuring that social housing is “available for those who genuinely need it” by giving landlords more control over who remains in social housing so that there can be a better match between need and provision.

LA 2011 amends the Housing Act

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll