Use of Section 21 evictions in the PRS – Debate

Use of Section 21 evictions in the PRS – Debate

15:23 PM, 21st November 2018, About 6 years ago 30

Text Size

On 6 December 2018, there will be a Westminster Hall debate on the Use of section 21 evictions in the private rented sector. The debate is scheduled to start at 1.30pm and the Member sponsoring this debate is Karen Buck MP.

The Library will produce a briefing or material for the debate and this page will be updated when it is made available. You can be notified when this takes place by emailing

House of Commons Library

Share This Article



18:55 PM, 21st November 2018, About 6 years ago

We strongly oppose the attempts to abolish a landlord's right to terminate the tenancy after the fixed term has expired.
Before the Housing Act 1996 a landlord was required to serve a section 20 notice (not to be confused with a section 21 notice). The purpose of this notice was to put the tenant on notice that they were entering into an AST and the landlord could claim the let property back. So tenants always knew the landlord could ask for the property back
If the landlord's right to terminate the tenancy after the fixed term is abolished under section 21 it would adversely affect the PRS. We fear the most disadvantaged tenants will be affected by this proposal.
If the local authority build more social housing, then a case could be made to abolish or tweak the section 21.
The British Landlords Association
Legal Team

LordOf TheManor

20:32 PM, 21st November 2018, About 6 years ago

Thanks for posting this.... so very relevant to our ever so recently concluded 7 month protracted eviction case! It almost ran to 8 months.... the solicitor advised that when the bailiffs go in, if there were any personal items left we had to give the tenant another 2 weeks to collect their stuff. (What???)

The correct route through the Courts for this case was via the Section 8 route, which would have been quicker - and was our preference by far. The legal firm appointed via the RGI policy (with a brief to minimise any wasted costs) insisted we go via the S21 route based on cost implications all round in case the tenants made payments at the last minute which could de-rail the repossession process.

Best to go for the no-fault route they said. Yes, but......surely not? A Section 8 should be what Section 8 says it is!! What has happened to devalue the pursuit of evicting a tenant quickly who cannot/will not pay??? It means they leave in greater debt somewhere down a long line, meanwhile financially depriving the landlord as well as someone else in need of a home. This just isn't equal justice for all!! Landlords of all persuasions have plentiful reasons to reclaim their propertes when their needs arise. This is being denied en masse due to an unfair bias that all tenants are innocent parties to an eviction. We all know this is a far stretch of the blanket....... and the S21 route is allowing them to get away with all sorts because it is the only reliable means of getting them out.... eventually.

We now have our property back.... but with malicious damage because the tenants were given plenty of time to enact it. Not happy enough to have been granted emergency accommodation, the tenants cleared what they wanted (not the rubbish, of course) and returned to wreck our property during the five week wait for the Court Bailiff. (The S21 Possession Order denied us access to High Court Enforcement)

On a cost basis, the legal world clearly have no faith in pursuing Section 8. If it is no longer respected or effective as an enforcement tool, it needs to be updated ASAP. Otherwise the Courts will continue to be clogged with the likes of our recent malevolent ex-tenants whom the Court believes are innocent parties to their eviction..... all because they are evicted via the S21 'no fault' route due to the whims of the financial underwriters rather than for the reasons of reality.

The situation now:
1. We are finalising the last amount of Rent due to us under the RGI insurance. It's been a slow claiming process with communication almost non-existent. We'll likely get paid out in full in the end after a long run at it. That's good.... however

2. We have today initiated a new claim under the same RGI policy for malicious damage. It is a separate claim section with a new team of people involved. Resending all the hard evidence for the current successful Rent claim has to be re-issued to that department. Some things are covered, some things aren't. (Read the 64 page booklet to find out more or simply just give up trying to work out what is what while you consider if your excess is worth a claim or not).

3. The same insurance company also covers us for landlords' buildings and contents insurance but as a separate policy it has different underwriters to the RGI policy. A separate excess is applied for 'building insurance ' claims (so they suggest you read their 64 page policy booklet to determine the extent of cover) before you submit a claim.

Both policies overlap in areas of damage to fixtures and fittings. After two hours on the phone this afternoon, we're none the wiser on which policy might pay out, for what or if at all.

Whatever the economies of the appointed solicitors dealing with the rent guarantee aspect of this case, we now have two separate insurance claims on the go. One messy, smelly broken house waits for the repairs it needs in the meantime. No one is likely to be housed in it for at least three months.

Legal fees 'saved' on the elongated S21 eviction process are now being spent on the consequential time it gave the tenants to enact their revenge.

What exactly is there to debate about S21?? Quit that, save time and get on and fix Section 8. The sooner, the better.



22:12 PM, 21st November 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by LordOf TheManor at 21/11/2018 - 20:32
That’s absolutely shocking.
Why is the law so much in the tenants favour.? I wouldn’t want to evict a tenant unless they weren’t paying their rent on time or damaging my property.
And if I needed my property back for my own personal use I’d expect it back with the correct notice given.
The prs landlords should be given more rights to reclaim their properties if the tenants default on the tenancy agreement.
The agreement are becoming worthless and not worth the paper they are written on!
The government ain’t gonna fix the housing problem and crippling the prs is not helping. I am seriously considering disposing of properties and they won’t be first time buyer properties.
I also have hmo properties and the licensing laws and minimum room size have made a direct impact on our income already.
The government need to back off before its to late.

tony jackson

8:38 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

Direct question to LordOf TheManor
for all the landlords reading this shocking situation your in, can you please tell us who is your rent guarantee insurance is from?

Derek t

8:53 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

With the current situation regarding evictions taking so long anyway we decided to sell 20 properties a few months ago via auction luckily we sold with a completion of 17( one block ) of them on Tuesday next week I can honestly say it is the best decision we have made as the amount of evictions with lower income / housing benefit tenants seems to have risen dramatically since the introduction of universal credit and can only see the situation getting worse as the government seem to be happy to kick the prs landlord at every given opportunity. Good luck with your property going forward must dash now meeting the bailiffs for a section 21 eviction 😂

Ian Narbeth

9:44 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

Logically there is no reason why a claim for arrears of rent should be excluded from a s21 possession claim. But the law requires landlords to issue separate proceedings and incur additional costs to recover arrears. In a lot of cases landlords just write them off. It is a scandal that landlords have to forego millions of pounds of rent arrears every year. It is a scandal that the most egregious deliberate theft and damage caused to a property by tenants is ignored by the police but a minor error with Prescribed Information paperwork by a landlord is treated as a heinous crime whereby a penalty of three months' rent goes to the tenant.

Annie Landlord

10:50 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by LordOf TheManor at 21/11/2018 - 20:32
I can't begin to imagine the stress you have endured, not only through the illegal and immoral actions of the tenant, but the abject failures in the legal system. I assume as you had RGI that the tenant wasn't in receipt of housing benefit?
The people pushing the ending, or more accurately, reform of S21, (The Labour Party, some councils, Shelter etc) are under the illusion that such a move will miraculously help more low income households to stay in their home. We know it will create more homelessness as landlords are selling up and some landlords who rent their own homes out on a time limited basis (soldiers deployed overseas for example) will simply not offer their home for rent at all.

Annie Landlord

10:51 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

Who are The British Landlords Association please?. Very comprehensive website. Why have I never heard of them?

Whiteskifreak Surrey

11:10 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Annie Landlord at 22/11/2018 - 10:51
This is the first time I heard of them, too. I have no time to check their website, but somehow the were not visible when we were fighting S24...

Ian Narbeth

11:32 AM, 22nd November 2018, About 6 years ago

And membership is free. How do they make their money? Can someone from the BLA post on here to explain please?

1 2 3

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