Tenant lied about receiving S8 Notice hearing adjourned?

Tenant lied about receiving S8 Notice hearing adjourned?

10:19 AM, 14th February 2023, About A year ago 65

Text Size

S.8 Notice was hand delivered and also posted 1st class, proof of postage and pictures showing delivery by hand were submitted. The Duty solicitor quoted Enfield v Devonish (1996, CofA) which the Judge had not heard of and was clearly frustrated and said it is not in dispute that the notice was served but there is no evidence the tenant had sight of it. The case has been adjourned to allow evidence to be gathered and is now in a few weeks.

My tenancy agreement does not have a clause regarding service but I thought I could rely on the Law and Property Act, apparently not! The tenant’s daughter confirmed to me twice that her Mum had been given the notice, but the Tenant denied this.

The Tenant has not lived at the property for about 18 months, we have had no communication for 2 years, any contact has been with the adult children who are working and living in the house rent-free. The rent arrears are over 12 months.

I have spent days researching and have spoken to so many solicitors I’ve lost count, no one has heard of this case.

I’m hoping someone here has and can help.


Share This Article


England Pi

17:36 PM, 14th February 2023, About A year ago

If you had employed a process server you could prove it had been served.

England Pi

17:39 PM, 14th February 2023, About A year ago

Justice Served https://justice-served.com trace absconded tenants and personally serve legal documents.

Miriam Johnson

17:42 PM, 14th February 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Laura Delow at 14/02/2023 - 11:06
I would issue section 21..no fault notice..then issue separate money claim for the arrears!

I just want to sell up!

17:57 PM, 14th February 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Chris H at 14/02/2023 - 17:33
Good for you putting a copy on the front door. I've had possession orders granted previously with the same TA and method of delivery, the difference here is the tenant is saying she did not receive the S8 notice.

Thanks again to everyone.


23:10 PM, 14th February 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Miriam Johnson at 14/02/2023 - 17:42Issuing a moneyclaim is vital, it does not have to be for the full amount owing. The documents are served at the last known address of the defendent; after about three weeks you can obtain a default judgement. You will never receive payment but will have the satisfaction of knowing that the tenant will have a low credit score and will find it difficult to obtain any further rental property or indeed a mortgage or a credit card or a bank account or in extreme cases employment.

David Bloop

6:58 AM, 15th February 2023, About A year ago

You did not state where you served the documents. If you knew the tenant did not live at the property but served at the property anyway, then it's for you to prove that you did all you can to find out where they are actually living for proper service otherwise the Court will side with the Defendant (or Respondent or whatever). That's my understanding anyway.

Julie Ford

9:09 AM, 15th February 2023, About A year ago

Having read the case in question. I note that this refers to a Secure tenancy, one which has a much higher security of tenure than an AST and of a local authority and the decision was based on Section 233 of the Local Government Act 1972.Which of course does not apply to private sector landlords.

In addition the case revolves around a second tenancy being entered into when the repayment was agreed. It was for this second secure tenancy that the judge felt notice had not been received.

Case law is not a blanket one size fits all, we all take a little bit from various decisions to build a case for defence ( or prosecution) My argument here would be that given the lesser tenure of the AST that Enfield v Devonish was not relevant in the requirement to prove the tenant had received the notice

Seething Landlord

10:03 AM, 15th February 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Julie Ford at 15/02/2023 - 09:09It's an interesting argument but I think the counter to it would be that an AST is a specific variety of assured tenancy and that the only differences between the two are those created by statute. Any thoughts on that?
Are you aware of any reason why standard tenancy agreements specify how documents can be served, other than to avoid the problem in the present case?


10:05 AM, 15th February 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 14/02/2023 - 16:34
"Judges have to apply the law."

No, it is wll established that judges DECIDE the law by their interpretation of the Statutes and Regulations in force and with the persuasion made by Counsel, if that were not so there would be no need for Appeal Courts; I once heard a Judge joke which goes something like "We have to have the higher courts to hear the decisons of the lower and to set them right". And even on decided law, judges and Magistrates are sometimes misguided or perverse.

To save a seconf reply, I'm unsure as to which tenant "turned up" do you mean the one in the referred to case or that of the OP, in either case case, and without further knowledge, I woud note that THEY DID turn uo and had thus somehow been communciated with. It is surely pervers to think that they received the Summons but not the duly served Notices, what pther address would the court have used?

Seething Landlord

10:39 AM, 15th February 2023, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 15/02/2023 - 10:05
Sorry, you might think that I am splitting hairs but your comment illustrates that judges apply the law according to their understanding of it. They decide how they believe it applies to the case in front of them. The fact that their decision is subject to appeal underlines the position.

To answer your second point, I was referring to the defendant in the OP's case, who was evidently present at the hearing. The debate is over what constitutes effective service when the tenancy agreement is silent on the matter, taking account of the argument raised by the defence lawyer, who cited the Enfield case.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now