Section 8 Possession Order without monies judgement?

To answer the original post, YES.

Once you proved arrears, you can ask for the Money Claim to be stayed. If you ask for the stay you can still evict but it may prompt payment also.

Thanks While,

Can you then use the normal small claim process to claims for ALL rent arrears once the tenant has left?

Is there a way to increase the amount on the small claim process, so you can serve the paperwork before the tenant is evicted, but then have the case heard after they have gone?

I am starting to think that doing a normal small claim as soon as the tenant is more than 1 month and 14 days behind, the tenant will most likely will not defend it. Repeat with a 2nd one when they are 2 months and 14 days behind.

Once you have won these two, is there ANYTHING anyone can say at the S8 hearing that would stop the eviction?

Reply to the comment left by "Ian Ringrose" at "04/03/2015 - 13:06":

Ian,
I agree most cases will be unaffected by this, because most tenants are decent people.
But some tenants aren't and that is when the problems will start.

"is there ANYTHING anyone can say at the S8 hearing that would stop the eviction?"

Not sure I get what you mean, if the arrears have been paid off by the small claim there is no basis for any section 8, ground 8 claim.

Reply to the comment left by "Monty Bodkin" at "04/03/2015 - 14:17":

I was assuming that the tenant has not paid up when ordered to do so by the small claims court, but that the small claims court had rules that they do own the rent.

A counter claim for disrepair or something during section 8 proceedings is not a claim the the rent is not due, it's a claim that the landlord also owes money to the tenant, thereby offsetting the amount due in rent.

As such, I think that (this is hypothetical since I have no experience), even if the landlord already has a money order for the rent, the tenant may still counter claim for disrepair, etc. Maybe the landlord could even end up with a money order against him...

Hi Ian

The 'normal small claim process' would apply but under the same claim number as the possession claim.

As the money claim is stayed, you would need to apply to have it restored.

Any application to have it restored would need to be served on the tenant. If the tenant is evicted and you do not have a forwarding address then you can only serve documents as per CPR 6.26, i.e. on their last known address.

The case of North British Housing vs Matthews says that the Court's power to adjourn the Part 8 is severly limited unless in Exceptional Circumstances. This is also supported by Section 9 Housing Act

Once a possession order under Ground 8 is given Section 89 Housing Act 1980 limits the time limit for postponement to 14 days unless in exceptional hardship where the time limit is 42 days

Philip Nam
White Collar (Legal and Admin) Ltd

Ive just evicted a tenant under section 8 for arrears that stood at nearly 6 months, this was due to delays for court availability and christmas etc. The judge issued a money order along with possession order, however the judge deducted the tenants deposit from the arrears!
I have visited the property and am horrified at the damage and mess the property has been left in. As I no longer have the deposit to use to cover some of the damage, the chances of recovering anything are slim to zero.
My point in this really is, do we as landlords ask that the deposit is kept separate to the arrears as now I have not only lost all the arrears but i now have a mammoth task of putting my property back in order at my expense as even if I pursue through small claims i do not believe this individual will pay what they owe!

Hi Marg

I do not think you can ask to keep the deposit separate from the arrears and surely that is the ultimate aim of the deposit to assist you in putting you back in the position you would have been if the tenant had been paying

You have already pursued the action and obtained a money Judgment. There is nothing further to pursue through 'smalls claims'. Your next step is enforcement of the debt which can be done in various ways.

Reply to the comment left by "Monty Bodkin" at "04/03/2015 - 12:53":

I'm with Romain on this one.
I have read the amendments currently in the Bill (and have followed them through the Lords' processes) and there seems to be little in there to affect decent landlords.
Specifically, the local authority MUST have issued a notice before the court hearing for the S21 to be invalidated.

The only issue I have (apart from it not giving sufficient protection to tenants from bad landlords) is the restriction that a S21 cannot be issued in the first 4 months of a tenancy. That means that it is impossible to issue a valid S21 for posession at the end of a 6-month initial term.
We should all now be writing to our MPs on this, as the Lords' amendments are going back to the commons for consideration next week.

If you can see loopholes for tenants in the proposals, then please let us all know.
(I can only see loopholes for landlords, and I am keping those to myself for now).

Hello Michael,

A pro rogue tenant can manufacture a fault on a property. Send a Christmas card to the landlord with free proof of posting. Nip down the council in January saying the landlord is refusing to answer calls and they have been forced to send written notice, see proof of posting. Environmental health come out, find the undetectable manufactured fault, serve notice on the landlord.
First the landlord hears about it is receiving the notice.
Tenant stops paying the rent and lives rent free for a year.
Might as well stick in an EH backed disrepair claim to pay for Christmas.
Repeat.

There is no obligation for EH to contact the landlord first.
Even if there was, the tenant could simply time it when the landlord is on holiday, give them a friends mobile number instead of the landlord etc

Far fetched?
Consider how common knowledge amongst rogue tenants is the disrepair defence for section 8.

(I can only see loopholes for landlords, and I am keping those to myself for now).

With you there Michael, keep it schtum!

What I am already doing is tightening up on tenant selection, being ultra cautious and taking more precautions.