Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions are ‘fundamentally unfair’

Reply to the comment left by graham mcauley at 21/02/2024 - 13:41I think you need to read up more on the legislation.
ASTs do not end when the fixed term is complete. They move to either a statutory (or contractual) periodic tenancy.
They only end when the tenant surrenders the tenancy or when a court grants possession to the landlord.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/understanding-the-possession-action-process-guidance-for-landlords-and-tenants/understanding-the-possession-action-process-a-guide-for-private-landlords-in-england-and-wales

Best to focus on what he's actually saying: "Mr Harris told the news site: “It’s fundamentally unfair. In a cost-of-living crisis twist, lots of landlords see their rates going up and decide to raise the rent or are pulling out of the market altogether and sell the property.

“We’ve seen numerous cases where rent has gone up significantly and people cannot afford it.”

He continued: “A lot of landlords are re-letting at a high rent so it’s really difficult to find a property at affordable rent."

All that he says here is true. It's the assertion that it's unfair that is nonsensical.

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 21/02/2024 - 13:56
I think you need to read understand what you are quoting, a tenancy agreement has an end date otherwise why have a SHT agreement, it will only become periodic, if the tenant does not leave on that end date,
Then a possession order is required

His view of 'fundamentally unfair' is irrelevant.
The law allows possession through this route and it stands until such time as the law is changed.
If he is suggesting that the 'no reason specified' is changed to one where EVERY reason has to be given, then actually that's a fair point. The majority of LL's don't go for possession on a whim. It's a costly and stressful process and usually only undertaken when they are at the end of their tether.
No good landlord would really object to having the law changed so that the exact and REAL reason has to be given. Why would they? Plain for ALL to see. Including Councils and pro tenant groups.
If you think about it, the hoo-haa from Shelter et al would stop on this point alone will cease overnight. A reason will always be given. They got what they wanted. Point proved, but at what cost?
We all know the effect this will have. They know too. This is why they have now shifted their focus to arguing about extending notice period timescales and the like.

Simon are you aware when you give a tenant a section 8 notice say for example rent arrears , this allows the council to exonerate themselves from any responsibility to re house the tenant has it is deemed that they have made themselves homeless.

I’m currently in a legal battle with my disrespectful tenant. I own a flat and rented it out to this fella who decided to punch holes in my walls, rip light fittings out and break all the tenancy agreement conditions, I issued him a section 21 which cost me £150, he then had 8 weeks to leave. On the date he was due to leave he messaged me to say he wasn’t going anywhere as it would make him homeless. I’ve now got to apply for a procession order which is £355 and not 100% guaranteed to evict him. I’ve now been told by my solicitor that I have to give him another section 21 as you only have six months to apply for a court procession order when the section 21 is served! How is this fair? All the protection is for the tenants, nothing for landlords!

Rents are affordable. If rents weren’t affordable, the market would adjust. They may not be affordable to some people. Perhaps those with other commitments and different priorities.
The problem is too much demand (caused by the government). Private tenants are competing with Serco (who can pay more than LHA rates to house migrants) and this is pushing rents higher.
But at least the hotels will be empty.

Reply to the comment left by graham mcauley at 21/02/2024 - 14:54
So, as I said, a tenancy ends when the tenant decides to leave or a court grants possession to the landlord

AST are indefinite.

Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 21/02/2024 - 19:12
You need to read the opening clauses of S21, which clearly speak of the fixed term tenancy coming to an end:

"on or after the coming to an end of an assured shorthold tenancy which was a fixed term tenancy, a court shall make an order for possession of the dwelling-house if it is satisfied—
(a)that the assured shorthold tenancy has come to an end and no further assured tenancy (whether shorthold or not) is for the time being in existence, other than [F1an assured shorthold periodic tenancy (whether statutory or not)];

The fact that a periodic tenancy comes into existence immediately does not mean that the original tenancy has not ended.

Does this ill-informed berk seriously believe that any landlord would ever evict a tenant who was paying their rent on time, looking after the property, sticking to the terms of the TA etc etc, only to self-impose a rental void of indeterminate length just for the hell of it???