header-logo header-logo

17 April 2019
Issue: 7837 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Landlord&tenant
printer mail-detail

Section 21 evictions given short shrift

Proposed changes could be ‘final straw’ for private landlords

Lawyers have expressed concerns about government proposals to ban ‘no-fault’ evictions―including that it could cause rents to rise.

The government announced proposals this week to repeal s 21 of the Housing Act 1988, which is used to obtain possession after a fixed-term assured shorthold tenancy ends or during a tenancy with no fixed end date. Once a s 21 notice is served, tenants have two months to vacate the premises.

Communities secretary James Brokenshire said some tenants avoid making complaints in case they are evicted.

Under the proposals, landlords would have to provide a ‘concrete, evidenced reason already specified in law’ to end the tenancy. Ministers will amend the s 8, Housing Act 1988 eviction process so that landlords can evict tenants if they want to sell the property or move into it themselves, and court processes will be ‘expedited’ to help landlords if their tenants fall into arrears or damage the property.

However, Joanne Young, legal director in Ashfords’ property litigation team, said: ‘No one can argue that there are some very poor practices by some private landlords, but this ignores the excellent private landlords who are providing great quality housing for tenants.

‘Those landlords, landlords I see on a day to day basis, do not use s 21 without good reason; it is used simply because it provides a means of obtaining possession that does not result in long court proceedings—proceedings that can have a significant financial impact on those landlords. Unless there are real improvements in the court process, I fear these proposals may be the final straw for many private landlords. I share the concerns that, in the long term, this may simply drive many landlords out of the market.’

James Browne, head of the property group at Lamb Chambers, said he had no confidence the possession procedure would be speeded up.

‘Landlords routinely wait for two months between issuing a claim and a first hearing. The ongoing county court closure process and inadequate judicial recruitment leads to cases being block-listed at 10am and often not heard until late in the afternoon leading to delay and increased legal costs.’

Issue: 7837 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Landlord&tenant
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll