Eviction under a Periodic Tenancy?

Reply to the comment left by DALE ROBERTS at 05/03/2018 - 20:41I have used distress for rent successfully in the last few years. When do you think the act was repealed?

Reply to the comment left by David Price at 06/03/2018 - 01:38During the legal process to evict the present nightmare tenant I have in my property, I quoted "Distress for Rent" to double the rent owed for the outstanding seven months. The Solicitor handling the matter advised that I could not use it as it had been repealed in April 2014 and the Courts would refuse the claim. Apparently it was used more for enforcing commercial arrears.
If he is incorrect I would appreciate knowing how you managed to get this awarded to you. In fact, I think all landlords would appreciate the advice.

Reply to the comment left by Chris Daniel at 05/03/2018 - 22:55I agree with you entirely and the Solicitor was instructed to do so but he did not. I really hope it doesn't take up to another 40 weeks to evict this tenant. I am already almost GBP20 000 in debit due to her non payment of rental and further, she has not paid Council Tax for the same period and has wilfully not paid her heating bills since 2015.
She should be in jail. Not housed at the expense of legitimate tax payers. She is a professinal scrounger who has milked the system for many years wihout being held accountable.

Reply to the comment left by DALE ROBERTS at 06/03/2018 - 06:59Mine was a case where the tenant gave notice and then failed to move out. I believe that this part of the act has not been repealed. Legal gurus could perhaps confirm or refute?

Reply to the comment left by David Price at 06/03/2018 - 07:33
David I would be interested in whether "Distress for Rent" would be applicable as my tenant gave written notice 8.11.15 and refused to move out and also said Council said to stay until evicted.

Reply to the comment left by DALE ROBERTS at 06/03/2018 - 07:07
Isn't jail another form of housing by legitimate tax payer?

Are you courting controversy Mr McBloggs?
I'll play along for now but frankly I expect a higher standard of argument from you 🙂
Of course it is. Tax payers are the fodder every ersatz democracy feeds off to bankroll a corrupt system. And there isn't much we can do about it. It's imperfect but hey ... at least we can delude ourselves into thinking we're better off than say .... North Korea.
To answer you succinctly? In jail the definite probability of ripping off another landlord is removed. And the tenant can't house several of her extended family in the same cell. Or stop paying her heating bills and council tax. Or go on overseas holidays because she's pocketed 7 months of my rental. Or trash the cell and break the furniture and fittings.

Reply to the comment left by Judith Wordsworth at 06/03/2018 - 10:56
I believe that you can change double rent in your circumstances provided you have a tenant waiting to move in. Suggest that you issue a bluff demand in the first instance but be prepared to back it up with legal action. Once again if any legal experts know differently then please advise.

Reply to the comment left by Hamish McBloggs at 05/03/2018 - 20:16They always tend to advise them of their rights. They advise the tenant that they have no homes to re-house them so at best they will end up in a backstreet B&B. So what decision is the tenant going to make? What Councils don't tend to do is follow the Gov't guidelines that requires them to assess whether the S21 or 8 is valid, determine if court action will proceed, the likely decision of the courts, whether the landlord can be persuaded somehow to keep the tenant. Based on an assessment of these facts the tenant should be re-housed, rather than delaying the inevitable and costing the landlord and busy courts time & money. They are also not good at advising the tenant of the consequences of going through the eviction process, i.e. CCJ, Tenant Black listing, difficulty in ever renting again, court costs etc! So the tenant generally is unable to make a balanced decision. The decision to stay is always in the favour of the council and is probably driven by the lack of housing at you cost! But we are all rich landlords - in their eyes!

Actually serial offenders who know how to manipulate the system do not care about CCJ's and evictions. They appear to wear them as badges of honour as testament to their ability to beat the system. And the very biased attitude of both the government and councils aid and abet this. Data protection is also a major hindrance to investigating a tenant's rental and credit history.
The tenant I am trying to evict has a long history of CCJ's and evictions to her discredit and she still managed to avoid exposure by nominating a guarantor who no longer lives in nor owns property in the UK. This tenant has also manged to run up thousands of pounds in Council tax arrears and utility bills and the response from the relevant organisations is to pursue the owner of the property. Not the tenant.
She is also a benefits cheat but although I've tried reporting this to the local Council they have not reacted.
The protective tenant system as it now stands is totally discriminatory towards landlords.
I will be liquidating my property portfolio as soon as they become vacant and until they are sold they will remain vacant.