Section 21 removal will cause chaos in courts

Reply to the comment left by Bristol Landlord at 17/08/2023 - 16:55
Admittedly not Black Roc but

Home REIT sells 40 properties at hefty loss as crisis worsens
Home REIT sold 1.6% of its property portfolio for £4.8m, or an average loss of 61%
The discount reflects the 'vacant status and condition' of most of the properties
It will use proceeds to pay down debt and provide working capital

Apparantly caused by people not paying the rent and properties needing extensive modernisation

Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 17/08/2023 - 17:59If the losses are true then this is indeed a sweet irony as all the damage caused by Government to landlords and tenants has been truly for no benefit to anyone.
I’d guess the plan for this despicable scheme, to destroy the PRS in favour of corporate landlords, was hatched a few years before the 2015 budget and so by now in 2023 the investment climate has changed.
This cowardly and corrupt government needs to change course right now before any more damage is done. Though of course by now there are too many promises made and vested interests involved to turn things around.
The PRS, like the Titanic, will continue on its path towards its very own Government made iceberg, the Renters Reform Bill.

Reply to the comment left by JaSam at 17/08/2023 - 13:53I hope so too. My tenant is six months behind in his rent. But he is going to claim that I allowed him the six months off because of his boiler being broken. Not true and absolutely no evidence this is the case. But if I get a dodgy judge, like the last one I had - he literally invented a deposit and threw my case out for not protecting it !!!! - then he/she will find a reason to do the same again.

The Government Loony Left Shelter and Generation Rent are under the illusion that Landlords will never leave the PRS, no matter how bad things are.
The momentum is growing Landlords are selling up in record numbers. Sell, Sell, Sell invest elsewhere

Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 17/08/2023 - 08:33
You mean that tenants would have to find the money to pay the extra expense this would cause?

Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 17/08/2023 - 16:36Meeting tenant beforehand for a friendly chat to get a feel for their character- check
ID check - check
Credit history check with no outstanding payments, defaults, CCJs - check
2 good references including current landlord - check
3 months' bank statements with rent paid regularly and on time.- check
Hopefully after all that you should get a law abiding citizen, whether or not they are DSS.

Reply to the comment left by Peter Merrick at 18/08/2023 - 00:05
Would love to meet this Law Abiding Citizen

This is exactly what the marxists at Shelter & Gen Rent want.
The court system is already clogged, like the NHS.
Eviction disputes will be treated as low priority by the courts who also hate landlords.
Back of the queue.
You'll be looking at years before getting to court, meanwhile the tenant will remain in your property most probably enjoying it rent free, and there's nothing the landlord can do.
When and if you finally get a date, you won't get compensation for loss of rent and the court might even stop the eviction because you missed a comma in the eviction letter or you crossed a 7 on the Section 8 form.
Back of the queue again, another year.
Rinse Repeat.

Reply to the comment left by Bristol Landlord at 17/08/2023 - 18:24
Gove can't be reined in because Sunak has absolutely no clue about the PRS.
He's been born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Privileged since birth.
He has no concept of how renting works. In fact he has little understanding of how anything works.
He's happy to delegate to even more incompetent and dangerous oafs like Gove. He can then pass the blame if it all goes wrong.

Reply to the comment left by Tracy at 17/08/2023 - 14:58Exactly
And it was supposed to be a quick method avoiding the courts altogether.
A landlord would be stupid to use section 21 if he was aware of complications on his part that would be challenged and so instead he would go to section 8 to save time.
The fact that section 21 is used, for the best part is because the landlord is simply exercising his right of termination of contract as stipulated in the Tenancy agreement.
In contract law if one party terminates under the termination clause they aren't forced to go to court every time they terminate a contract within the termination clause.
Similarly tenants don't have to apply to the courts to end their tenancy and leave after one month's notice. So why should a landlord have to?
Its clear violation of contract law and discrimination against the private landlords.
If a tenant wants to challenge an eviction which is watertight then he should be liable for all costs plus a fine for wasting the courts time.