Courts need more cash to help prevent tenant eviction – Law Society

Never mind the legal aid. The courts need a good shake up so that landlords don't have to wait months for a simple decision to enforce a legally binding AST agreement.

The Law Society shouldn't be taking sides like that. Why isn't it asking for funding for more Court availability instead?

The harsh reality is, the should be seeking uphold of the law, and if that means evicting bad or non-paying tenants, well, that's the law. Judges should be competent and brave enough to see through bad claims, that's their job!

The Law Society simply wants more money for its members.

They don’t care about tenants anymore than Labour or the Tories care about tenants. It’s just spin.

The Law Society are not the most vibrant organisation I have come across over my over 50 years membership as a solicitor admitted 53 years ago. But they try.
I have screamed and shouted over the last 20 years or so about the chronic and totally cynical underfunding by both major parties of the Justice, Courts and Prison services. I started as a criminal practitioner and then 'went civil' as personal injury work came to the fore in my work and as an insurance company lawyer, so I know what I am talking about.
The shambles we are now in has been totally foreseeable in all that time.
Don't blame the lawyers, like Shakespeare! Blame the meanminded and political grubbing politicians for hitting an easy target every time, the poor and disadvantaged and the ordinary folk (thee and me) who want justice?

Well we have to look at why these possessions scenarios.
1) Mortgage lenders seeking possession due to mortgage arrears is the highest reason. Tenant does not need any “legal representation and access to justice”. It’s a done deal what is there for the tenant to contest ?
2) Rent arrears, again what legal representation does a tenant need when they owe many months, if not years of rent.

3) Anti social behaviour. Again tenant should pay for their own legal team not the taxpayer.

I think I put this elsewhere last week, apologies for duplicating, but message needs to be got out.

So the Law Society want more help for tenants to SLOW down/STOP the eviction. Yet in the same breath, they acknowledge Mortgage repossessions rising. So instead of FINDING OUT WHY mortgage orders for possession are rising & why Landlords evicting, they want to prolong the agony of the Landlord even longer, more arrears, more repossessions. Now are these Law Society supposed to be clever people? Or have they ZERO common sense or lack forward thinking?

Help one tenant now who is not paying rent, CRUCIFY the Landlord, what happens next year? Can't they see this or is my Asperger's more qualified than their law degrees?
You've caused that Landlord demonstrable loss, pain, Mental health agony, he's told all us other Landlord colleagues, we then accelerate our selling, the new Landlords buying DON'T house the sort of tenants that need your help.

Come and ASK Landlord WHY they evicting. You cannot solve a problem till you understand it. Ditch the Law Degree, come & get Asperger's.

if you pressured the Govt for direct payment on UC direct payment & communication with Landlord, you'd solve 30% of homeless. The UC Landlord communication alone would save £6 billion in just overpayments.
If you scrapped Selective Licensing, you'd save 25% of homeless.
If you scrapped Section 24, you'd save 20% of homeless.
The list goes on.

Sort this out, the tenants would have somewhere affordable to live & wun't need your help.

So,

“When faced with repossession, renters should be entitled to legal representation and access to justice.”
He added: “However, an underfunded justice system has denied renters a fair chance in court due to lack of legal aid.”

It seems that once again, the landlord will be prejudiced because of their status. If we require legal assistance we have to pay for it: the tenants however will receive this service without charge if they qualify.

Surely a judge, with an average salary of £100,000 to £295,000, has sufficient expertise to assess the merits of any case before him/her.

It is suggested that renters are denied a fair chance in court due to lack of legal aid: many landlords cannot afford this service which they do not receive without charge and have to rely on their understanding of an often-complex system and for a judge to make a decision/order.

Clearly, if a lack of legal aid detrimentally affects renters, it must also affect landlords: yet once again, we remain penalised by a system geared to act against us.

Perhaps I am missing something, but becoming frustrated with the way we, often caring and the victim of abuse and exploitation are portrayed.

Just my thoughts.

I cannot comment on what the Law Society may want about any particular subject; you must ask them and you can do, direct.
My 20 years wail has been unanswered. You have the consequences before you,
Politically, blame both parties.

Easy solution to all this, when a tenant leaves sell up.

Reply to the comment left by Ray Guselli at 18/11/2024 - 11:02
S8 Ground 8 is the most widely used. It is Mandatory. The Judge has no cause to reject it if the conditions are met, and no landlord is likely to submit a claim unless the conditions are met. As such, the Judge must grant possession, regardless of any legal aid the tenant has.