Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

davidbraken

What Is The Eviction Process?

Recommended Posts

Guest X-QUORK

I don't know the exact details, but I think you call on a Friday night and leave your vote, then Davina interviews the evictee a bit later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tenants can be evicted for mainly, breaking the terms of their lease.

Most usual reason: failure to pay rent.

Most residential property today is let only on Shorthold Assured Tenancy.

The lease agreement spells out the duties of both the tenant and the landlord.

It is a criminal offence for a landlord (Or their appointed agent) to harass tenants.

In most cases of non-payment of rent, the tenant/s do a moonlight flit: it is then up to the landlord to trace them and extract the back rent and any other associated costs.

In most cases (There are now few exceptions), a landlord must take action for re-possession by eviction, through the County Court.

The Courts tend to exercise considerable discretion in these cases, unless the tenant has a track record!

In the case of a young mother with a very young child, Courts are most reluctant to evict them and tend to exercise considerable tolerance; even where no rent has been paid for months.

Tenancy, in general is covered under The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954: which has been amended and updated with various additions and changes ever since it was passed.

This act also covers commercial property lettings.

It is a highly complex aspect of English Law: other earlier acts (Law of Property Act 1926) can and do still effect aspects of residential property, however mainly now in terms of long term leases which have been purchased (Leaseholds): which themselves were amended considerably by the Leasehold Reform Act, (1967, 1993 and 2002).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prescience quoted "The Courts tend to exercise considerable discretion in these cases, unless the tenant has a track record!In the case of a young mother with a very young child, Courts are most reluctant to evict them and tend to exercise considerable tolerance; even where no rent has been paid for months."

Fortunately where I have been involved in having to evict (on behalf of clients of course) a family they have never turned up at the hearing so the judge automatically rubber stamps the 'eviction' (or proceeding this orders the tenant to leave within 14 days, at risk of eviction)

My experience in general is the opposite of your comments. Mosts of my dealings with the County Court have shown that District Judges look down on rent shirkers. Of those I have attended over the years, leaving aside the 'no shows' I have only had one tenant given a stay of execution, for 40 days, and this was cited as because Christmas was approaching. All others have proceeded smoothly. I believe that most of the stories that you hear of being unable to evict bad tenants for 6 months or more are extreme examples, or, where the landlord has not carried out the (relatively simple) eviction process correctly. Other examples of protracted evictions probably relate to those that get legal counsel and either have genuine greivances or happen to come across a sympathetic D.J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tenants can be evicted for mainly, breaking the terms of their lease.

Most usual reason: failure to pay rent.

Most residential property today is let only on Shorthold Assured Tenancy.

The lease agreement spells out the duties of both the tenant and the landlord.

It is a criminal offence for a landlord (Or their appointed agent) to harass tenants.

In most cases of non-payment of rent, the tenant/s do a moonlight flit: it is then up to the landlord to trace them and extract the back rent and any other associated costs.

In most cases (There are now few exceptions), a landlord must take action for re-possession by eviction, through the County Court.

The Courts tend to exercise considerable discretion in these cases, unless the tenant has a track record!

In the case of a young mother with a very young child, Courts are most reluctant to evict them and tend to exercise considerable tolerance; even where no rent has been paid for months.

Tenancy, in general is covered under The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954: which has been amended and updated with various additions and changes ever since it was passed.

a couple of points here are inaccurate I'm afraid, or at least very out of date

almost all residential tenancies now come under the Housing Act 1988, amended by the Housing Act 1996 - this was a completely new regime under which assured and assured shorthold tenancies were introuduced - the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 I think applies to business tenancies but can't be sure on that

HA 1988 tenants have no defence to eviciiton on several grounds - the most usual being 2 montsh rent arrears - the judge must order repossessiopn and has only very limited discretion to delay

and of course there is no defence if your asured shorthold has ended

then once the court has ordered repossession the landlord can have the yenanst evicted by the court bailiffs if they do not leave of theri own volition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All English tenancy law including HAs (There are a number in fact: 1966, 1979, 1988, 1996, 2004 et al) flows mainly from the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

Some even dates back to the 1927 Act.

E.g. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Act...a_19270036_en_3

As with all English law, precedents can be and are cited.

There are still many leases extant which were established prior to the new regime of Shorthold Assured Tenancies.

What actually happens in law is that subsequent legislation modifies and codifies as well as interprets and updates earlier statute.

Knowing many landlords who have lost significant revenue from their rent roll, we tend to err on the side of caution and carry out intensive vetting and checking on any tenant application.

There are a number of methodologies tenants can employ to delay possession: despite the court's ruling.

And rental income lost is rarely if ever recovered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All English tenancy law including HAs (There are a number in fact: 1966, 1979, 1988, 1996, 2004 et al) flows mainly from the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

What actually happens in law is that subsequent legislation modifies and codifies as well as interprets and updates earlier statute.

can you give any examples of where the assured and assured shorthold tenancy regime flows from the LTA 1954

I can see how the HA 1988 interacts with common law rules and various other acts and regulations, but was not aware of any linkage with the LTA 1954

not being argumentative, just interested

it always seemed to me to be pretty much a fresh start, in contrast with the more gradual changes that had come before and had culminated in the Rent Act 1977

There are a number of methodologies tenants can employ to delay possession: despite the court's ruling.

if you're talking about delaying the mandatory grounds for possession this is something I'd also be very interested in if you would kindly expand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   287 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.