0:01 AM, 23rd October 2023, About A year ago 44
Text Size
One landlord organisation is calling for amending Section 21 rather than abolishing it.
Ahead of its presentation next month, iHowz has penned a letter to MPs and Lords laying out their plans to revamp Section 21.
iHowz says they are very concerned about the potential unintended consequences of the removal of Section 21.
iHowz argues many landlords use Section 21 as a vital mechanism within their toolkit.
It warns: “Sensible, professional landlords use the S21 as a ’backstop’ mechanism, allowing them to manage the risk of housing a vulnerable person, who, on paper, could be an acceptable risk.
“These vulnerable tenants include the homeless, offenders, as well as the economically disadvantaged.
“Many of these landlords offer with the caveat that the vulnerable person will be given a chance, as long as they pay the rent in a timely manner and don’t cause Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB)
iHowz say Section 21 gives a chance for landlords to reclaim their property.
“Many tenants accept a second chance because the S21 allows landlords recovery of the property, particularly in the event of ASB.”
The organisation added: “iHowz is advised by many members that, in the event of losing the S21, they will substantially increase their due diligence before offering a new tenancy. This due diligence is likely to extend beyond financial and previous landlord references, with landlords requiring tenants to provide a guarantor.”
iHowz suggests a two part amendment to Section 21.
“We would like to see a sliding scale of notice required, based on the time a tenant has been in situ, in association with a recompense scheme.
“The sliding scale would recognise loyal tenants, by providing them more time to find a new home and plan their move to accommodate other factors, such as schooling.
The landlord organisation believe that in most cases a tenant who has been in situ for a number of years is most likely to be served a S21 notice by a landlord who needs the property back, to sell, refurbish or improve it.
iHowz said :“Many tenants have limited or no savings, so making the last two months of the tenancy rent free provides them funding to use for moving costs and any deposit or rent in advance for their new home.”
iHowz believe these actions will be a significant improvement for tenants and landlords by making the process fairer whist retaining the only proven mechanism for removing antisocial tenants, who’s actions blight the lives of tenants and their neighbours.
The landlord organisation said: “We strongly believe that all these measures taken together would give tenants substantial security of tenure, whilst allowing landlords to offer to a potentially bad-risk person, with the aspiration that they will eventually integrate into the mainstream community.”
When asked about how landlords would view the proposals to give up two months rent and the need for longer notice to regain possession, iHowz highlighted that their proposal would allow landlords to continue to have access to S21.
The landlord organisation said landlords would then not have to rely on the government’s proposed new Section 8 grounds and improvements to the court process.
iHowz said: “The certainty of the current S21 process is worth the cost of these concessions, given that waiting for the courts will take many months, during which time tenants often stop paying their rent.
“This provides them an incentive to move on while recognising that we are asking them to leave. With the second reading of the Renters Reform Bill scheduled for this week the proposal has assumed new urgency.”
Clint
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up21:14 PM, 28th October 2023, About A year ago
Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 28/10/2023 - 20:45
Seething Landlord - I don't say that there are no retaliation evictions. I certainly don't use S21 for this and that is the honest truth.
I personally cannot in reality see why a retaliation eviction should take place as the tenant has the right to report a disrepair to the council after which the council should normally serve a disrepair notice. Once this is done the Landlord cannot evict the tenant for a minimum of 6 months after the repair is carried out.
I cannot see a landlord evicting a tenant the instance the tenant requests a repair unless what the tenant is requesting is totally unreasonable and much more than just a repair.
I really cannot see where Shelter gets their figures from but I certainly do know that, I had a tenant that owed me around 4 months rent a few years ago and the tenant was being evicted using a section 8 notice and Shelter engaged a solicitor to protect the tenant as disrepair came into the equation where prior to the S8 notice and possession hearing taking place nothing was mentioned about disrepair. Ultimately, the eviction went ahead where I agreed to wipe off the debts and let the tenant stay for another 28 days or so as there was some wording in the application that was not quite right. BTW the disrepair was to do with a leak from the flat above where a washing machine leaked and it took sometime for the flat above to stop the leak.
So to sum up, I treat what Shelter say with a pinch of salt so if we had reasons given for eviction in a S21 that would greatly help with the statistics.
I do however, agree with you that it is unlikely that a landlord would state that they were evicting a tenant for disrepair if at all they were. I also believe such landlords should not be in the business.
Seething Landlord
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up21:32 PM, 28th October 2023, About A year ago
Reply to the comment left by Clint at 28/10/2023 - 21:14
Clint, I assume that Shelter get their information from polling, analysis of published reports on housing condition, the thousands of phone calls from tenants seeking help to name a few sources.
You appear to agree that reasons given by landlords would not necessarily be reliable so that makes a nonsense of the whole idea, quite apart from the impossibility of having a "no reason given" ground for possession which requires you to give a reason.
As I see it there are two options, either leave S21 as it is or get rid of it and fill the gap with additional grounds under S8, coupled with reform of the courts.
Clint
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up21:39 PM, 28th October 2023, About A year ago
Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 28/10/2023 - 21:32
Seething Landlord, I believe that for the statistics the question should be put but as I said in my very first message regarding this, there should be an option where the Landlord does not have to give a reason.
Ultimately, we all have our views and I think one should be given the opportunity to give a reason and this I believe would be the best statistics collected and I believe most landlords are honest in this respect.
To sum up I believe we both agree to disagree with each other, and I will leave it at that.
graham mcauley
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:10 PM, 30th October 2023, About A year ago
Reply to the comment left by Russell Cartner at 28/10/2023 - 21:08
The last time I used section 21, possession was granted, did not have to give a reason but the magistrate, quietly asked me, are there rent arrears?
I answered yes, he just nodded as if it was what he was already thinking.
They know, the government knows, and Shelter etc all know why section 21 is used, and why they all want it abolished, it is because it can takes months or years to get rid of a problem tenant, using section 8, if they come up with some spurious defence, but section 21 is easier, and quicker.
So the longer they are your tenants the better.