Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
SarahBell

Tenant Evictions At Highest Level

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26160569

He and his wife had built up rent arrears of more than £3,000.

When the bailiff came, they expected to be given a reasonable amount of time to pack up their belongings.

"He said, 'Well guys, you've got 10 minutes.' That was just shocking, absolutely shocking," said Andrew.

--

Had he not got legal advice about the process? Not asked for HB help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any idea what counts as an eviction? I ask because we'll likely be moving out later on this year, but not through choice. Although there are no arrears or other issues, we could be out under the right of a LL to remove tenants without recourse.

These are forced evictions that have gone through the courts. If your AST fixed term ends and the landlord tells you to leave that's just run of the mill "charging you to use my land is no longer to my maximum advantage, please p*ss off" stuff. nobody will be counting that, it must happen in the hundreds of thousands a year.

interesting that the forced eviction rate for tenants is currently more than 4x that for 'homeowners'. It must be because renters are happy to parade around naked in front of their neighbours' children.

Edited by gimble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is most of the rise is from LA & HA evictions. All things being equal you'd have to say it's the bedroom subsidy, but that's probably just the tipping point in the move to push public sector rents up to market value.

It's a right mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.gov.uk/search?q=Mortgage+and+landlord+possession+statistics&tab=government-results

I would assume it means court evictions as a S21/S8 is not an eviction.

I'd c&p but it turns out funny from a pdf.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279342/mortgage-landlord-possession-statistics-oct-dec-2013.pdf

Loads of juicy stuff there

OO repossessions down because " In

addition, the downward tren

d in recent years coincides with a decrease in

the number of owner-occupiers

9"

Edited by SarahBell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any idea what counts as an eviction? I ask because we'll likely be moving out later on this year, but not through choice. Although there are no arrears or other issues, we could be out under the right of a LL to remove tenants without recourse.

The tenancy doesn't end until the Court says it does by granting a possession notice and in the case of an expired AST the judge can't usually refuse the landlord. If you are not out by the possession order date, the landlord can then apply for an eviction warrant.

Those tenants in the OP must have ignored a lot of letters from the Court! Even so if they were truly unaware of what was happening they could have got down the County Court office and had the possession notice and eviction warrant stayed pronto (if their grounds were good enough).

Also usually the bailiff calls before and makes an appointment, or leaves his card, so they must have ignored that too.

I'm starting to ignore a lot of stuff I read in the press, because usually the facts are blurred and the salient points are missing. A bailiff can't just turn up out of the blue on the say so of a rentier, are the most salient bullet points to draw from all this :lol:

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A bailiff can't just turn up out of the blue on the say so of a rentier, are the most salient bullet points to draw from all this :lol:

Or to a business.

I have just heard someone claim they didn't know they'd been took to court by the local paper until they came and took stock!

Yeah right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lad the same age as me in the flat underneath got evicted last week. His mistake was taking on part time work, which led to a whole host of problems, he ended up being worse off than dole and his hb claim got messed up. He wasn't on top of everything and he got evicted.

His possessions thrown out into a skip and then destroyed before he had time to collect them. Fortunately for him, I took most of his stuff into my flat, and he will be collected it on Monday.

He was legally evicted but surely it can't be legal to just throw somebodies possessions into a skip and them get put into landfill?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lad the same age as me in the flat underneath got evicted last week. His mistake was taking on part time work, which led to a whole host of problems, he ended up being worse off than dole and his hb claim got messed up. He wasn't on top of everything and he got evicted.

His possessions thrown out into a skip and then destroyed before he had time to collect them. Fortunately for him, I took most of his stuff into my flat, and he will be collected it on Monday.

He was legally evicted but surely it can't be legal to just throw somebodies possessions into a skip and them get put into landfill?

Wouldn't have thought so. Former ho moanerz tend to be given time to collect. Can only assume that was Council/HA bods.

Even here in Kirklees appliances left behind by tenants such as cookers and fridges get recycled by the Council

For this to happen the evictee mustn't have kept on top of the paperwork and Court etc, as you say. The problem he has now is that he can kiss goodbye to another social tenancy until the arrears are paid off.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lad the same age as me in the flat underneath got evicted last week. His mistake was taking on part time work, which led to a whole host of problems, he ended up being worse off than dole and his hb claim got messed up. He wasn't on top of everything and he got evicted.

His possessions thrown out into a skip and then destroyed before he had time to collect them. Fortunately for him, I took most of his stuff into my flat, and he will be collected it on Monday.

He was legally evicted but surely it can't be legal to just throw somebodies possessions into a skip and them get put into landfill?

Pretty crap outcome, for someone who was "having a go"! It's shameful that people are treated like this! :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lad the same age as me in the flat underneath got evicted last week. His mistake was taking on part time work, which led to a whole host of problems, he ended up being worse off than dole and his hb claim got messed up. He wasn't on top of everything and he got evicted.

His possessions thrown out into a skip and then destroyed before he had time to collect them. Fortunately for him, I took most of his stuff into my flat, and he will be collected it on Monday.

He was legally evicted but surely it can't be legal to just throw somebodies possessions into a skip and them get put into landfill?

No.

Landlord has obligation to store them and offer the back. Can charge storage I think. And they can be sld to cover rent arrears.

But beng legally evicted gets you plenty of warning the bailiffs are coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty crap outcome, for someone who was "having a go"! It's shameful that people are treated like this! :o

Agreed.

Sounds rather like where I was in 2002/3[1]: far worse off than on the dole. If IDS's reforms haven't done anything to fix that, what's the point?

[1] And earlier, but 2002 is when the savings ran out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or to a business.

I have just heard someone claim they didn't know they'd been took to court by the local paper until they came and took stock!

Yeah right.

Actually very common and easy to become innocently caught up with. Court things are much more slapdash than people imagine. Documents sent out aren't recorded and often don't include property numbers or postcodes. With the exception of publicly employed court bailiffs they'll typically attempt to bully the money out of anyone they stumble across regardless of whether they owe it or not.

Lost count of the number of times I've had to pay them money not owed/or someone else's debt to go away. It's usually worse if you move into a property where the previous tenant or occupant collapsed into insolvency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lad the same age as me in the flat underneath got evicted last week. His mistake was taking on part time work, which led to a whole host of problems, he ended up being worse off than dole and his hb claim got messed up. He wasn't on top of everything and he got evicted.

This is what a lot of people don't understand about the benefits system- it's rigged like a booby trap to screw up anyone who tries to help themselves like this guy. Not intentionally but through a combination of institutional incompetence and authentic contempt for the people it's supposed to serve.

A contempt so strong in fact that if you suggested to the average person that the true role of the benefits system was to serve the unemployed they would almost instinctively say WTF? Followed by a comment like 'Why should my tax money be used to serve those lazy f*ckers.

But if it does not exist to serve the unemployed- then what is it's actual purpose? To punish, to ensnare in a Kafkaesque bureaucracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what a lot of people don't understand about the benefits system- it's rigged like a booby trap to screw up anyone who tries to help themselves like this guy. Not intentionally but through a combination of institutional incompetence and authentic contempt for the people it's supposed to serve.

A contempt so strong in fact that if you suggested to the average person that the true role of the benefits system was to serve the unemployed they would almost instinctively say WTF? Followed by a comment like 'Why should my tax money be used to serve those lazy f*ckers.

But if it does not exist to serve the unemployed- then what is it's actual purpose? To punish, to ensnare in a Kafkaesque bureaucracy?

The system is desperately slow to react, and housing benefit departments especially. UC was supposedly going to solve this operating in real time. Then you have the problem of 100% 'taxation' till you are earning at least NMW and no longer need to rely on benefits.

Citizens Income is the answer, but that would appeal to the Daily Mail brigade, or the Tories trying to implement 19th century dogma in an increasingly part time, advanced semi automated economy.

The irony being that if SEY's neighbour had just signed back on, and claimed full HB and JSA he'd probably have saved his tenancy,

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Sounds rather like where I was in 2002/3[1]: far worse off than on the dole. If IDS's reforms haven't done anything to fix that, what's the point?

[1] And earlier, but 2002 is when the savings ran out.

I've had some scary times too! Part time work just doesn't work if you are unemployed! Always the small people that get crapped on! The likes of Google get way with paying in a lesser share, by moving their offices to Bermuda or whatever! I'm sounding like Karl Marx! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had some scary times too! Part time work just doesn't work if you are unemployed! Always the small people that get crapped on! The likes of Google get way with paying in a lesser share, by moving their offices to Bermuda or whatever! I'm sounding like Karl Marx! :blink:

Google are doing us a favour, by highlighting how corporation tax (the one they and many bigcos can avoid) is unfit for purpose.

Even if it didn't throw up anomalies like US-registered Starbucks not paying while UK-registered Costa pays, corporation tax is a huge incentive for companies to take on the maximum debt they (think they) can get away with. Hence it's one of the big drivers of the 2008-ish boom&bust, and the death and zombification of companies whose debt suddenly went from no problem to overwhelming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google are doing us a favour, by highlighting how corporation tax (the one they and many bigcos can avoid) is unfit for purpose.

Even if it didn't throw up anomalies like US-registered Starbucks not paying while UK-registered Costa pays, corporation tax is a huge incentive for companies to take on the maximum debt they (think they) can get away with. Hence it's one of the big drivers of the 2008-ish boom&bust, and the death and zombification of companies whose debt suddenly went from no problem to overwhelming.

Can you explain this a little more? I'd be interested to understand the mechanism how this works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain this a little more? I'd be interested to understand the mechanism how this works.

Company needs to raise money. It can do so either by selling shares (equity) or by borrowing (debt).

Investors buying either shares or bonds are seeking a return on their money. Shareholders get paid dividends, bondholders get paid interest.

But here's the crucial difference. Interest on debt is paid before tax, but dividends are paid after corporation tax. So if you have a company in a steady state, it's better to hold bonds than shares. Companies are aware of that, and so like to raise as much finance through debt as they judge they can reasonably sustain.

As a rule, the bigger a company and the more steady and reliable its revenue stream, the more debt it can issue without damaging its credit rating. So for example the utilities that supply our water and energy have very stable and reliable revenue streams, so can and do take on huge debt while retaining high credit ratings. Without corporation tax, the reason to prefer that over equity would disappear.

Now consider companies that take on huge debt on the strength of a property portfolio. Lots of them went down or got zombified in the "credit crunch". Pubcos and nursing home providers, for instance. Casualties of a sudden change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

Landlord has obligation to store them and offer the back. Can charge storage I think. And they can be sld to cover rent arrears.

But beng legally evicted gets you plenty of warning the bailiffs are coming.

How long must they store them for?

Maybe my ex-neighbour has had his possessions illegally disposed of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smaller time commercial property landlords often get badly caught the same way. They re-enter and change the locks then set about selling the contents.

Some years back there were these brothers that had a small commercial property empire of half a dozen shops or so. They re-entered on a Prontaprint type copy shop. They sold off all the equipment in the local auction, which was a completely unsuitable venue, where it all made nothing due to the wrong audience of potential buyers.

Well, anyway, it transpired they obviously weren't entitled to do this, which may have been ok if the kit belonged to the tenant, as they may not have had the resources to pursue it legally. Unfortunately it was about £500k of kit on lease from a big manufacturer like Xerox, or similar. Both brothers ended up bankrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"When the bailiff came, they expected to be given a reasonable amount of time to pack up their belongings.

"He said, 'Well guys, you've got 10 minutes.' That was just shocking, absolutely shocking," said Andrew."

Typical shoddy journalism by the BBC, the reporter only had to look at the date on the Notice to Quit to see that this chap is lying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"When the bailiff came, they expected to be given a reasonable amount of time to pack up their belongings.

"He said, 'Well guys, you've got 10 minutes.' That was just shocking, absolutely shocking," said Andrew."

Typical shoddy journalism by the BBC, the reporter only had to look at the date on the Notice to Quit to see that this chap is lying

Roughly translated: Byuy now quick, before the bailiffs come and kick you out of your rental.. Well that's the message being conveyed by the BBC - Buy a house because rentals are insecure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long must they store them for?

Maybe my ex-neighbour has had his possessions illegally disposed of?

Possibly.

It won't have been bailiffs emptying the property though.

For reposs

What happens to belongings in a repossessed home?

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repossession/eviction_by_the_bailiffs

Bailiffs won't remove any of your furniture or belongings unless the court has decided they should do so.

If you don't remove your belongings, they will be left locked inside the property. You will need to make arrangements with your lender or freeholder to collect them later.

You will normally have to remove everything within a short period of time, for example, two weeks. If you don't do this and don't make other arrangements, your lender or freeholder may dispose of your belongings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   220 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.