Received a section 21 eviction-anything we can do?

Planner

bayon wrote: »

The section 21 letter was delivered by hand though the door. It wasn't signed for so if we said we never got it would they have to issue another? .

No they wouldnt.

Is the s.21 notice served correct? ie correct dates and deposits protected?

Brb

bayon wrote: »

Thanks for the replies and advice.
It's as we thought - no choice but to move out or risk getting no reference from this landlord.
The section 21 letter was delivered by hand though the door. It wasn't signed for so if we said we never got it would they have to issue another? The letting agency representing the LL have been very incompetent in the past so it is plausible they could mess up a delivery.

They would only need a witness statement or photograph of them shoving letter through your door.

theartfullodger

I agree with most of the advice above...

Herewith
http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/renting_and_leasehold/private_tenancies/assured_tenancies#8

what you can do to delay your leaving (probably a couple of months...) but you may not get a good reference as indicated above. The again if, say, after 9 weeks you find somewhere to move to and need a reference - they are likely to give you a good one aren't they???

Beyond simply waiting for court case/bailiffs, you can challenge the notice on the basis of, as indicated above..

a) Wording incorrect (happens surprisingly often).. or dates wrong (compare to your tenancy agreement &/or contact CaB/Shelter)
b) Assert the notice was not validly served (i.e. there were no witnesses/photos..). Landlord would have been stupid not to get witness etc. but a surprising number don't...
c) If deposit not protected and/or tenant not been given "prescribed info" then S21 is invalid anyway.


It only needs one tenant to win these arguments to delay the plans.. which is when I'd expect the landlord to get his chequebook out..

Cheers!

Artful

Planner

Keep in mind that why the s.21 may be invalid in the statutory sense (post the details and we will tell you), it may well be valid in the contractural sense (again post the break clause details and we will tell you).

Failing answers to the above, we have probably told you all we can.

theartfullodger

It would be reprehensible of me to suggest checking with the local planning department to see what if any plans for development have been put in and objecting to them, on any and all valid grounds.. if only to delay things. Yes, reprehensible so I won;t suggest that, oh no!!

Jowo_2

bayon wrote: »

..The section 21 letter was delivered by hand though the door. It wasn't signed for so if we said we never got it would they have to issue another? ...

A landlord doesn't have to prove that the tenant has read it - it can be served on properties where the tenant is known to have abandoned the property or where properties have been sublet by the tenant to others.

They only require to provide evidence that it's been served at the address. In the case of hand delivery, they may have a witness, for example. In the case of postal service, they may not necessarily have a 'signed for' document as the tenant may refuse to accept it, realising what it could be. The landlord may instead have a proof of posting certificate from the post office.

You could argue when it reaches court that you did not get a copy but you'd have to take the risk that the agent may have proof it has been served.

In my opinion, you'd be better off applying your energy and resources to looking for onward accommodation because even if you successfully defend the notice on this occasion, it will simply be issued correctly at the earliest opportunity. It just postpones the inevitable.

Planner

theartfullodger wrote: »

It would be reprehensible of me to suggest checking with the local planning department to see what if any plans for development have been put in and objecting to them, on any and all valid grounds.. if only to delay things. Yes, reprehensible so I won;t suggest that, oh no!!

There may well be no requirement for planning at all - the proposed development being flats to erm flats!

Jowo_2

Out of curiosity, is the property in the south-east or in an area that's likely to be affected by the proposed local housing caps and move from 50th to 30th percentile of local rents for the LHA rates?

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/local-authority-staff/housing-benefit/claims-processing/local-housing-allowance/impact-of-changes.shtml

http://www.voa.gov.uk/lhadirect/lha-emergency-budget-news-2010.htm

I wonder whether the landlord considers that this is likely to impact those in receipt of benefits who are much more likely to get into arrears? Many people who receive LHA are in employment and this would also increase the top-up they would have to pay to the landlord.

Brb

Jowo wrote: »

In my opinion, you'd be better off applying your energy and resources to looking for onward accommodation because even if you successfully defend the notice on this occasion, it will simply be issued correctly at the earliest opportunity. It just postpones the inevitable.

Definately.

Even if you waited for court order, you will be months behind some of the other Ts who will have snapped up what's available.

I do think it's an odd time of year to boot ppl out to start redecorating/tarting up though. Of course this matters not to your situation, you need to get a wriggle on.

N79

theartfullodger wrote: »

b) Assert the notice was not validly served (i.e. there were no witnesses/photos..). Landlord would have been stupid not to get witness etc. but a surprising number don't...

No no no no no and no . Unusually dreadful opinion from you Artful.

Clearly the notice was served, the OP has received it and they have admitted receiving it. Therefore to claim otherwise is simply not true. Claim it on a court form or in court and that is perjury. Suddenly a simple LL and T dispute has put the T at risk of a criminal conviction and jail.

Arguably you have also committed an offence in your post as it could be argued you are inciting the OP to lie to the court.

Getting a S21 declared invalid on a technicality (either to do with service (eg late service) or due to a mistake in content) is a perfectly valid tactic to defend a possession case and any T that wants to do this should be supported. Lying to the court by claiming not to have received notices you have is criminal. This is not the way to deal with this issue.