Court delays persist despite government claims of progress
4 months ago | 6 comments
Government claims possession reforms will ease court pressure
9:54 AM, 8th May 2026, 6 days ago
16
Categories:
The government claims its reforms will reduce the number of possession cases reaching the courts, despite industry experts warning of an overload in the court system.
In answer to a written question, Baroness Leavitt said that because only cases with clear, well-evidenced grounds will be able to proceed, court demand should fall.
However, as the Renters’ Rights Act has now come into effect, one landlord association warns that time will tell whether the courts can handle an influx in cases.
Reduce court demand
Under the Act, Section 21 is now abolished, and all landlords will need to use Section 8 grounds for possession.
Conservative Lord Jamieson asked: “Whether the government expect a reduction in the average time it takes for a landlord to regain possession through the courts as a result of the Renters’ Rights Act and if so, when?”
Baroness Leavitt claimed the reforms would help reduce court demand
She said: “The Ministry of Justice publishes quarterly possession statistics which monitor the volume and timeliness of possession claims in the County Court. The Civil Procedure Rules state that possession hearings should be listed between 4 and 8 weeks of a claim being issued.
“The latest possession statistics for October to December 2025, show a mean average of 7.3 weeks from claim to order, down from 8.0 weeks for the same period in 2024.
“In the longer term, we expect the reforms to reduce the volume of possession claims as only those cases where there is a clear, well-evidenced ground for possession will be able to proceed. We are also developing a new digital possession service, doing away with outdated paper processes and reducing the chance of mistakes being made.
“The timeliness of the court possession process is influenced by a number of factors, including user behaviour.”
Time will tell
However, the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) has warned time will tell if courts can handle possession cases quickly and fairly.
Ben Beadle, chief executive of the NRLA, said on the NRLA website: “The housing minister, Matthew Pennycook, has stressed more than once that landlords will still be able to regain their properties quickly when necessary and that the courts can cope. Time will tell.
“In the meantime, it is essential we and the government actively monitor implementation and consider litigation and the impact of case law as parts of the Act are tested in court.”
As previously reported by Property118, in a letter to the Justice Select Committee, the NRLA warned that the government has not provided clarity on how the courts will be prepared for the digital possession process.
Comments
Have Your Say
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
or
Related Articles
Landlords challenged at Tribunal found to be overcharging on service charges
3 months ago | 5 comments
Shared owners may be exempt from 12-month no re-let rule
2 weeks ago | 2 comments
Member Since June 2019 - Comments: 803
9:05 AM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
Clear evidenced cases – read we will ignore as many claims as possible and will champion every excuse for not evicting.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1194
9:49 AM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
Sounds like theyre relying on landlords not having the evidence to evict despite potentially having a legitimate need to do so.
Member Since May 2022 - Comments: 91
10:10 AM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
Sounds like they’re “smashing the gangs” again or “one in one out”…
In other words, they haven’t a clue
Member Since April 2018 - Comments: 393
10:14 AM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 08/05/2026 – 09:05
Exactly. Another of Starmer’s appointees.
Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2212 - Articles: 2
11:47 AM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
It is getting difficult to see from which end this emanates. The government is merely expressing a wish list with no evidence to back its claims.
Member Since May 2014 - Comments: 151
11:58 AM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
This communist soon-to-be-gone government are utterly incompetent at actually running the country in any way useful. They just target their enemies abusing their huge power, they are corrupt to the core & have wrecked everything they`ve touched, a disaster for the last two years.
Member Since February 2025 - Comments: 74
12:08 PM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
She provided the wrong statistic. How long is it taking for possession hearings to be listed, and will one hearing suffice or will most cases be adjourned with directions to prepare for another one? If the “issue to possession order” statistic she is quoting is based on most cases being under s 21, and if every case under s.8 will require a hearing, then the statistic is no guide to what will happen now.
Member Since January 2017 - Comments: 117
2:05 PM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
Courts can’t cope now and the workload will increase substancially. I’m hearing people waitng more than a year to get back their properties, where really it should be less than a month.
Member Since February 2024 - Comments: 75
2:10 PM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
” Well Evidenced” …. if rent arrears surely the tenants rent account going back to start of tenancy, copy of letters to tenant regarding arrears and offer of payment plan should be enough Evidence surely? Tenant could spin a sob story I expect. If landlord wishes to sell what Evidence should he produce?
Member Since June 2019 - Comments: 803
3:19 PM, 8th May 2026, About 6 days ago
The new form is weird. You tick a box to say why you are evicting then you have to cut and paste the relevent parts of law into an empty text box, this should be automatic based on the reason ticked. It feels like an attempt to trip up the landlord. There is an extra random box for reasons and justification; again it seems that they hope you will write something invalid in that box.