Campaigners criticise five-year wait for Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions ban

There's been a proposed amendment that means councils will have a duty to house if a section 8 has been used. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

With respect to section 21, I read a quote on this forum somewhere: "no good landlord evicts a good tenant, without good reason". Perhaps a slogan for a pro landlord charity we should set up.

The reason that so many people are in tempory accommodation is because theres not enough houses, simples.

Reply to the comment left by Harry at 15/04/2024 - 10:18
threatened with, does not mean evicted. Actual evicted numbers need to be given not theoretical.

It could then be said that there were X number NOT actually evicted!

Reply to the comment left by Liam at 15/04/2024 - 12:12me too. Why is why its important for landlords who do evict once S21 goes, to list not only the obvious ground, like selling up or moving in/relative in, but ALSO the reason why this may have prompted that ground to be used.
I don't for one min think that landlords are going to list discretionary grounds as the only reason for possession in the 'new' S8 (and leave themselves open to tenant defence) so all that will happen is landlords will probably choose the sale/family member ground just to get possession asap.
At the same time there is NOTHING stopping the LL also listing the rent arrears/anti social ground to be able to show this as a REASON why the mandatory ground had to be used.
That will make it clear to both the Council that the tenant actions DID force the possession (so yes they made themselves intentionally homeless) and show Shelter the real reason too. They hide behind the idea ' no reason' means evil LL, they will soon come to realise it means 'feckless tenant' too.

It will also mean when a tenant is looking for a new tenancy, and they say they/the council say they have been evicted, the new LL CAN ASK to see the 'new' S8 as part of the referencing process. The reason for possession will be there for all to see....

How many bl$$dy homeless charities are there? It's an absolute industry and a lot of people are doing very nicely off the back of it!
I always look these charities up on the Charity Commission's website to see what their income is and you can usually find out what the top executives are on. Across all of the main ones there's several hundred million flowing in EVERY year and yet they don't house one person. Why don't they actually build the bl$$dy houses that all the governments have failed to do?
They're all mealy-mouthed virtue-signallers who don't seem to understand basic economics, or that not all tenants are lovely cuddly saints!

The Tories were fools to fall for the spin. They were even bigger fools to promise the abolition of s21 five years ago.
However, Section 21 is no more the cause of homelessness than people getting dismissed from a job is the cause of unemployment. People become homeless because they can't afford the rent and there are too many people chasing too few houses. People become unemployed because they cannot find a new job.
I take issue with Rick Henderson. It is incorrect that “Everyone deserves a safe, secure place to live". Those who lie about their circumstances to secure a tenancy, those who can pay but don't pay the rent and those who trash the property are not deserving. Nobody is compelled to leave on two months' notice. For most evictions it takes months longer.
The eviction moratorium during the pandemic was an exceptional measure for exceptional times. It is no more the solution to homelessness than banning employers from sacking workers is the solution to unemployment.

‘Government changing legislation or the tax regime’ should be a Ground for Section 8.

Conservatives continue to move the goal posts . Labour threaten to remove the goal posts all together.

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 15/04/2024 - 17:35
unfortunately we all know this to be true, but putting that on a S8 will get you nowhere.

Ensuring the discretionary Ground for rent arrears and ASBO are ticked and evidence given (if relevant of course) IN ADDITION TO the mandatory ground of selling/moving a family member in, AND making it clear that the two are connected may well hit the point home though.
Especially the councils - they will have to ask for the reason for the possession from either the T or LL and may well want a copy to boot.

This is an area which the likes of Shelter et al have seemingly not picked up on (perfect ammo to have a go at the government again)...or have they and are ignoring it because they know it applies to the nightmare tenants anyway....

Why is it that these charities and other bodies seem to think that it's PRS LL's duty to provide these wonderful homes that everyone is 'entitled to'?

We are not obliged - but very many of us actually do - but we are a diminishing number, for reasons that have been discussed ad nauseum on Property 118.

It is the individual’s own responsibility to obtain housing suited to their needs, and for those who are unwell or unable to afford such housing, it is for the state - local or national - to step in and provide or assist. They are the ones with the statutory obligation, not PRS LLs, yet the responsibility is being shifted, and this is in my view unreasonable.

It is not the role of PRS LLs to maintain near-indefinite tenancies, including when tenants breach the contract and leave an individual LL crippled, whether financially or with anxiety. Is it surprising then that the worry about not being able to recover possession of our properties when required under the proposed RRB is driving us out of the industry? How on earth can these ‘charities’ (not housing providers themselves), not realise this and stop the ‘demands’ being made of PRS LLs with the associated consequences of diminishing supply of the much-needed homes?

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 15/04/2024 - 11:03
Exactly! Don’t the tenants/Shelter etc realise that?

Although I see later in the thread that the law will (probably) change so Councils need to house the intentionally homeless as well.