What happens if a tenant just doesnt leave?

N79

You got it more or less correct. It can get more complicated but your post covers a fairly typical all the way eviction. There are a couple of errors here which I have corrected in red just for the record.

betmunch wrote: »

Hi Everyone,

I was wondering if anyone would have the time to explain to me what happens at the end of a tenancy when a landlord wants the property back but the tenant just doesnt leave?

I understand the following procedure takes place, could someone confirm it or point out where it needs changing?

1. Notice is served to co-incide with end of the AST.
2. End of AST, but tenant simply doesnt pack up and leave.
3. LL applies for a court date, which takes aprox 2 months to come round. The LL applies for a possession order. Under the accelerated possession procedures this is a paperwork exercise and will probably not involve an actual court hearing. What happens is that the judge looks at the paperwork and if all is in order the possession order granted. There will only be a hearing if the judge does not understand some aspect of the paperwork or if the T submits a valid defence which the court wishes to test. An example would be if the T claims they did not receive their notice and the LL has not supplied sufficient evidence that it was, hence the case will be heard to decide over this contested fact.
4. Court agrees with LL that tenant should leave so gives tenant a month to find a new house. Standard possession order is possession in 14 days. In reality, most Ts can string a story together that will get them a 28 day order. Longer than this is rare and would require a strong argument from the T (I have kids and no money wont cut it here).
5. a month passes, but tenant still didnt bother finding a new place to live. As indicated this period is 14/28 days
6. LL goes back to court, another (2 month wait for a date?) so the judge can order the bailiffs round to remove tenant. The LL does not go back to court. The judge has already ordered the Ts to go - that is what the possession order does. The LL instructs the court bailiffs directly without going back to the court / judge. The LL can instruct the bailiffs the day after the possession order expires so there is no 2 month delay here.
7 Bailiffs are busy so take another month to take possession of the property, but now tenant is gone so property can be re-let. Normal bailiff times are between 4-8 weeks although you may be lucky and they say "we had a cancellation for tomorrow morning - can we come and smash your door down then?" Obviously this only happens where your T has not made any threats to you or your agents or officers of the court.

Is this right?

How are the time scales?

Have I missed anything out?

I realise this is a very simple situation and I bet things get a lot more complicated than this!

Any help would be greatly apreciated

Cheers

teeni

saved me some typing there N79 as i was about to make the same comments.
cheers

mostlycheerful

“Originally Posted by michmike
Maybe a stupid question, but... what if you wait until tenants are absent from the property, open the door, throw out all their stuff and change the locks?

Jowo 24-08-2010, 12:53 PM
Criminal offence - landlord leaves themselves open to prosecution and steep civil penalties to compensate the tenant.

A local council private sector relations officer will simply arrange for the police to break into the property and let the tenants back.”

No, that’s not true, that’s just urban myth, 99 times out of a 100 the tenants make themselves scarce and consider themselves lucky not to have got their heads kicked in as well. Rip off tenants rarely muck about with the coppers and courts, they’re mostly wrong’uns on the run and when it’s clear that the game is up and that there’s little or nothing more to steal then they get lost. They’re rarely strong enough or in a position to fight and most of them are just fraudsters trying it on so then they go and rip off another unwary landlord rather than trying to squeeze a few more drops out of the previous victim. A lot of bad tenants are druggies and alcies and crims and fiddling their benefits and the last thing they want is any attention from the police. The coppers rarely bother to attend anything like this, they normally only come out if there’s talk of violence and they mostly don’t have enough time or manpower or resources to waste on commercial “civil” matters such as rip off tenants being evicted. As always, there’s a lot of theoretical hooey talked by ignorant people who have no experience of life and the world and who are unaware that in reality most bad behaviour by tenants is dealt with efficiently by robust landlords who know what’s what and don’t muck about. Time is money after all and if everyone had to queue up for months while still being ripped off to just then get ripped off all over again by the courts then nothing would get done and no one would make any money.

No, the court route is simply last resort, not first option. Court is mainly just what a small minority of a few weak ignorant novice landlords do but as the court process fails so miserably all the time most sensible robust landlords just get the job done themselves. As most regular successful landlords will tell you if you take the trouble to ask.

BitterAndTwisted

Quite a few of the posters on this forum are professional landlords, some of whom have posted on this thread and not a single one of them have espoused the kind of "robust" and illegal process you have described.

I think you've been reading too many Rachman-era penny-dreadfuls or something. If you're a landlord and you think acting in that way is acceptable I'd cheerfully wave you off to court in the blinking of an eye and have my fingers crossed that you get a custodial sentence.

sequence

mostlycheerful has to be a troll..

BitterAndTwisted

A troll who likes typing. A lot

olly300

sequence wrote: »

mostlycheerful has to be a troll..

Not necessarily.

One of my former landlords' had a method of getting rid of difficult tenants.

He didn't chuck their stuff out or change the locks as that would be illegal.

It also helped that normally the relationship between him and his tenants was good so he had no problems getting access to the property to do repairs, etc.

robpw2

olly300 wrote: »

Not necessarily.

One of my former landlords' had a method of getting rid of difficult tenants.

He didn't chuck their stuff out or change the locks as that would be illegal.

It also helped that normally the relationship between him and his tenants was good so he had no problems getting access to the property to do repairs, etc.

so how did he get them out then ? even if they let him in to do repairs does not mean they would have to leave

mostlycheerful

No, not a troll, I’m just aware of certain things going on in life and the business world and what is common practise and when I see requests for help and information, sometimes coupled with wrong thinking, ignorance and a lack of information of what is the reality and how it generally happens in real life, then I’ll pop in and offer suggestions - and my opinion and analysis - and some info and data to explain it. If you look at my other posts you’ll see that none of them are trollish, they’re all sincerely attempting to be helpful and to shed a bit of light on a problem and suggest possible solutions and ways forward. As I said, court’s a last resort, not a first option, and a lot of issues in property are solved by the people involved without recourse to law. And I explained that and fleshed it out with a realistic appraisal of how a lot of these situations go down. If the way I phrased it is too raw or rough or inflammatory then I apologise but it’s true what I said that most of these kind of situations are solved by the people whose livelihoods are at stake without use of law - and no, I don’t support or sanction illegal behaviour or nastiness or violence or bullying or taking advantage of or oppressing vulnerable people, on the contrary, I support people if they’re being ripped off, including landlords. No, I was simply commenting on the fact that a lot of landlords achieve their aims without recourse to law, which often fails to supply a workable solution. Oh, and by the way, I’m not one myself (a property business person or landlord etc) but a few years ago I had a window on some property business in London and saw and heard various property people at work and how they dealt with tenants ripping them off and that is the origin of my awareness of this subject. Ok?

wheeliebin_2

I can answer this one from experience. We consulted a solicitor who said that the most efficient way to get them to move out was to pay the tenant. I thought that was the most ridiculous thing I ever heard of. Sat down and thought about it and it actually made sense. Rent was £650 a month, they could have drawn it out for 6 months if they wanted.... Paid the scrotes £1000 to move out. And they had the audacity to count it in front of me. They were DSS and hadn't bothered renewing their housing benefit. It was 15 years ago and I still seethe at the thought of it