Tenants face being unfairly evicted ‘every 15 minutes’ this summer – claim

Reply to the comment left by Parmeader shinh at 19/07/2023 - 09:23
the only way a "database" can be created is from CCJ's, you can't have one where landlords add tenants on a whim because they fell out! It has to be court generated to have any standing and CCJ's create that.
If you want access to further information, ask the tenant to provide it. If they don't, don't give them an AST, find another tenant.

Every S21 has a fault, it may not be the tenants fault, but they all have a cause, and that should be put before a court.

If judges start seeing multiple S21's in front of them with cause listed as "landlord financial hardship due to S24, property being sold", it will then start getting seen and noted by those that influence the lawmakers.

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 19/07/2023 - 09:43
why can’t there be a data base where LL’s answer simple factual questions? It doesn’t need to be complicated or be a scoring system, just simple enough to lead the user to draw there own conclusion.

Hers some examples;

1. Did you serve a S21 on this tenant? Yes/No
If so, for what reason
2. Did you serve a S8 on this tenancy? Yes/No
If so for what reason

3 During the tenancy period, was the tenant ever late with their rent payment(s) or missed any rent payments?

4 At the end of the tenancy, did you need to withhold some or all of the tenants deposit ? Yes/No
If “yes” please explain why

5. Would you re-let to this tenant ? Yes/No
If “no”. Please explain your reasons

6. Would you recommend this tenant to a fellow landlord? Yes/No
If “no”, please explain your reasons why.

I cannot see a problem as long as the answers are facts based and not opinion.

Just my view 👍

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 19/07/2023 - 09:43
Agreed

Reply to the comment left by Martin O'Hearne at 19/07/2023 - 09:54
1 - S21's are being served for the wrong reasons.

2. S8 are not being served when they should

3. I've had multiple tenants over they years that have had payment issues, but have invariably sorted them out by working with the tenants. Usually HB/UC related or health or work issues. Doesn't mean they were bad tenants in the long run.

4. any explanation should be documented by the DPS scheme in use.

5. invariably opinion based

6. as 5.

the potential for a landlord to expose themselves to libel would be far too high.

CCJ's are the only way to protect landlords

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 19/07/2023 - 08:15
The problem here is that a S8 can be challenged by a tenant. Those who know how to play the system do so. We used to serve a S21 as that would guarantee us possession & then follow up 2 weeks prior to the S21 expiring with a S8 that would expire on the same day as the S21. This way we got possession and the tenant got a CCJ for their rent arrears. Not had to do this for years though so not sure if this option is still available (though I can't see why not)

Reply to the comment left by Alison Walker at 19/07/2023 - 10:17
but this is the whole point I'm making, S21 is being wrongly used to guarantee possession.

If S8 is also reformed and applied correctly, S8 should guarantee possession where the tenant is in breach of the AST.

We would then stop seeing all the media headlines slating landlords for "no fault S21 evictions". Will the media report "Tenant evicted under S8 for arrears"? Of course not.

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 19/07/2023 - 10:13
There is no “wrong reason” for serving S21 -
LL can say “no reason” but we all know there is always a very valid reason.
LL simply answers “arrears” “ASB” “selling property” etc.
If it’s the truth then there isn’t a problems, if they’re lying then they have the problem.
LL’s mistrust S8 hence S21 being used.
(25 yrs a self managed portfolio LL and even I would use S21 over S8 to guarantee my property back)
4 Any explanation would be documented by DPS, LL simply needs to cut & paste - again fact based
5. Not if based on facts
6. As above.
LL would not leave themselves open to liable if information was factual and not hearsay - if LL exaggerates (says five months arrears when it was two) then more fool them, but subjectiveness is impossible to successfully prosecute!

Look for reasons to do things, not for reasons not to!

There's no such thing as an "unfair eviction"

A Tenant agrees to and signs a rental contract fully understanding the terms.
Under Law the Landlord can only evict a tenant within the terms of the rental agreement and subject to the agreed notice period.

Until The rent reform bill is passed evictions properly executed by the landlord under the terms of the tenancy agreement are NOT "unfair evictions" regardless of the reason for eviction.

This is typical evocative and emotional language used by the Marxists in Generation Rent & Shelter to tarnish all landlords hoping to add even more drastic amendments to this totally unfair and drastically damaging Bill, and to try to rush it through Parliament without due process. A Bill which should have been scrapped in first reading by any genuine conservative government.

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 19/07/2023 - 08:15
Section 21 can be for anything, including non payment of rent of for nothing.
The Landlord ultimately has the option to recover his property when he decides and does not have to give a reason.
The process is stipulated by law, the ultimate result is stipulated by the Landlord
So yes MY PROPERTY, MY RULES until and only if we become a Communist state.

Reply to the comment left by DSR at 18/07/2023 - 09:35
Exactly, there's always a reason and it's usually rent arrears