3 years ago | 36 comments
The government has confirmed councils should not be telling tenants to stay in a property when facing eviction.
A story in The Telegraph says the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) has claimed “there is no excuse” for councils to be issuing this advice.
Property118 has previously investigated whether councils have been acting illegally when telling tenants to stay put.
The Homelessness Code of Guidance makes clear that when someone is at risk of homelessness, councils are expected to take proactive steps to prevent it.
It specifically warns against delaying action, adding: “Housing authorities should not consider it reasonable for an applicant to remain in occupation until eviction by a bailiff.”
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government told The Telegraph that councils should not be advising tenants to stay in a property until bailiffs arrive.
They told the newspaper: “Local authorities should not be encouraging all tenants to remain in their property until eviction by a bailiff.
“Every case should be assessed on its own merits, and councils are expected to provide appropriate support to help people secure safe and suitable accommodation if they are evicted.”
The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) accused councils of “stoking animosity between landlords and tenants” over telling tenants to stay put.
A spokesman told The Telegraph: “Rather than stoking animosity between landlords and tenants, councils must do their utmost to collaborate more closely with all parties to work out solutions which reduce costs and disruption for all parties.
“There is no excuse for advising tenants to ignore legitimate possession claims.”
Nathan Emerson, of Propertymark, added: “This approach contradicts the code of practice, which makes clear that councils should not adopt a blanket policy of telling tenants to stay put and wait for bailiffs to arrive.”
The process of advising tenants to remain in their rented home when facing eviction has been criticised, with landlords saying it increases stress for both tenants and landlords while adding legal costs and delays.
A landlord who wished to remain anonymous told The Telegraph that councils make them feel like “villains”.
They said: “It is standard practice now for councils to do this. You’re made to feel like the villain.
“You wait months to go to court, fight for a meaningless possession order date, re-apply to the court, pay again, wait and wait while your tenant is in arrears and then you eventually get bailiffs.
“After all this, I was asked later on to give a glowing reference for the tenant. I didn’t.”
As previously reported by Property118, Canterbury City Council was found at fault by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.
The case involved a private landlord, known as Mr X, who served a Section 21 notice in February 2024 so he could carry out repair works. The notice expired in May, but the tenants did not leave, pointing to advice they received from the council.
The Ombudsman said the authority “did not contact Mr X, as the landlord, throughout the process, or consider whether it was reasonable for the tenant to remain in occupation during the relevant period”. That failure, it added, led to “frustration and uncertainty”.
A Canterbury City Council spokesperson told The Telegraph that while it offers legal advice to tenants facing eviction, it is not council policy to tell tenants to stay put until bailiffs arrive.
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
3 years ago | 36 comments
2 weeks ago | 13 comments
3 years ago | 11 comments
Sorry. You must be logged in to view this form.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2035
4:50 PM, 28th April 2026, About 1 hour ago
Reply to the comment left by Person Of The People at 28/04/2026 – 16:43
As it took I think six years and four prime ministers to bring about the Renters Rights Act I’m not seeing any changes happening quickly. I think that anyone who holds their property in a limited company (I don’t) doesn’t have too much to worry about because it’s hard for the government to attack the limited company club. They only attack the little people.
I’d be surprised if this lot are in power in six years from now. And as they aren’t going to build 1.5 million new homes I think that they will be forced to change some of their policies. I don’t believe in the direction of travel but I think that one way or another I will be able to get my property back before government gets control over it.
As always, when faced with incompetent government, the people who will suffer for bad policy are tenants.
Member Since January 2025 - Comments: 99
5:32 PM, 28th April 2026, About 40 minutes ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 28/04/2026 – 16:50
Again, I admire your positivity. And yes, we do need an urgent change in government.
However, we are so far down an economic black hole — technically a doom loop, with no prospect of real growth — that an incoming government will struggle to know which sectors it can deregulate in anticipation of higher tax receipts.
Meanwhile, all any government can do is use regulation and taxation to redistribute wealth, which is exactly what is happening in the PRS.
Government does not have to attack the company structure directly; it simply has to attack the property held within the company. Overseas companies holding UK property already have to register their property interests at Companies House or risk losing the property. The same mechanism can be extended to onshore companies, with regulators presenting it as a measure to ensure that they know where the funds are coming from and where the funds are going — after they have been appropriately taxed.
Property is one of the easiest assets to tax because it is immovable and exists only by virtue of your registered title at the government controlled HMLR.
The only real way back may be an economic breakdown, with the IMF stepping in and imposing sound fiscal discipline, as it did in 1976. Greece only recovered after similar discipline was imposed between 2010 and 2015.
Let us hope history does not repeat itself…