Section 21 No Fault Notice

franklee

jjlandlord wrote: »

I think a LL's agreement that T can stay is even more serious as it could imo invalidate the notice altogether: After all it means that LL no longer requires possession.

That's been chewed over quite a lot, I agree with you based on what I've read e.g. from Painsmith a few years back. However some of the forum regulars disagree IIRC. I don't think either side has produced a case study as yet. However it's got to be reasonable grounds to dispute the notice which may be long enough of itself to allow a tenant to arrange moving and as you mentioned before get off having to pay the LL's court fees. So even if not watertight in voiding the S21 it's still worth a tenant having that option.

princeofpounds

A LL has to wait in the queue along with everyone else. I'm sure other types of business or individuals who want court time think their own case is just as worthy. Should a LL for example be able to jump the queue over a tenant wanting their deposit back, or an old lady making a claim for something entirely different.

I do think depriving someone of their home is sufficiently important to require court if it's disputed.

Sure, my point on speeding up the court process was a 'magic wand' scenario for precisely that reason.

jamie11

I'm not sure if it was here or elsewhere, but it has been mooted that a dedicated lesser court or tribunal could be set up to deal with these non-criminal matters, or even a council department to oversee the fair treatment of tenants and landlords alike. With fewer courts and judges I think it might be a good idea, come on Cameron, we all know you read this site, what about it?

Brallaqueen

Artful is correct that there are lots of grounds for possession, but only one ground is guaranteed to get a possession order. (A font of knowledge, is Artful)

From anecdotes on this and other sites, trying to get a possession order on one or more discretionary grounds is close to impossible. If there were more mandatory grounds then perhaps section 21 could be done away with

If more grounds were mandatory

theartfullodger

Brallaqueen wrote: »

Artful is correct that there are lots of grounds for possession, but only one ground is guaranteed to get a possession order. (A font of knowledge, is Artful)

.............

Sigh!!! Ah, bask in warm glow & then get real... we aim to please, we aim to please...

err.. up to a point .. there are 8 (e-i-g-h-t), count 'em, mandatory grounds under which one is guaranteed to get possession see
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/schedule/2

Yeah, most of no bleedin' use except for Ground 1, Landlord once lived there...

I reckon the wise Landlord who has a short void would be well advised to take up residence (council tax, leccy & gas bills etc.., file them all away carefully...) for a few weeks then have that one available to them also.. for when that nice Mr Cameron (not, I've never voted Conservative & never will) changes the LL/T laws..

Just a thought mind..

(Don't it show the devious mind of the Landlord..)

Cheers!

Artful

PS The pedant in me cannot resist: Should be "fount of knowledge.." surely?? , apologies..: A font only has a small amount of water, a fount (=fountain..) carries on spouting... Now, where are those pills the doctor said would reduce the symtoms...

Brallaqueen

font

1    /fɒnt/ Show Spelled[font] Show IPA
noun 1. a receptacle, usually of stone, as in a baptistery or church, containing the water used in baptism.

2. a receptacle for holy water; stoup.

3. a productive source: The book is a font of useful tips for travelers.

4. the reservoir for oil in a lamp.

5. Archaic . a fountain.

so we're both right?

theartfullodger

Apologies: It's probably my age: "fount" was the only usage I recall from when I woz a lad..

It could be a mute point of course (arrrrggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...)

antrobus

theartfullodger wrote: »

...Morality in Landlord/Tenant relationship?? Now, there's a thought: Write to Cameron & see if he wants to change things... Conservatives?? By their actions yee shall know them....

Well Labour had thirteen long years (1997-2010) to change things, so presumably the same thing applies to them.

P.S. Why not write to Clegg and ask him too. It is supposed to be a coalition.

Yorkie1

jamie11 wrote: »

That's all very well, but what do you suggest follows that? At present, if a tenant digs his heels in, it is around six months before bailiffs can enforce the possession.

I would be very happy to give a six month 'no fault' notice to a tenant if I needed to regain possession, but only if, at the end of that time, I was able to be guaranteed possession without having to go to court or employ the court bailiff at extra expense.

I stress that this should only be for genuine 'no fault' cases, not for those where the S21 is served 'because it's easier'.

Imagine the amount of peripheral litigation (and court time / costs) trying to prove a case was one rather than the other :eek:

antrobus

theartfullodger wrote: »

Apologies: It's probably my age: "fount" was the only usage I recall from when I woz a lad..

It could be a mute point of course (arrrrggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...)

Given that http://www.fount-of-knowledge.co.uk/HomePage/cms/temp_home.html exists on the interweb, if you're wrong, you're not alone.