We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Landlord has evicted me and changed locks
Comments
-
MissMoneypenny wrote: »"To any police officers who may happen to read this, it is not difficult. Unlawful eviction is an indictable criminal offence – Protection from Eviction Act 1977 s.1.
If someone has belongings in a property and has a key for the property, it is an odds on bet that they have a right to reside there and fall under the Protection from Eviction Act (not certain, granted, but more likely than not). So, if the landlord isn’t armed with the required court orders, it is not a good idea to a) assist the landlord, b) take the keys from the occupant, c) physically remove the occupant from the property or d) arrest the occupant because they won’t leave.
In fact, if the occupant has a tenancy agreement and the landlord doesn’t have court orders, you may want to consider actually arresting the landlord…
"
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2010/07/illegal-eviction-and-the-police/
From the nearlyleagl blog on
Naughton v Whittle and Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. Manchester County Court 30/11/2009 (Legal Action July 2010
You could have added that the landlord ended up paying nearly £10,000 in damages to the wrongfully-evicted tenant in that case.
I agree with Hamish, for once, that the law is unfairly biased against landlords and in favour of tenants. That could be improved by speeding up the legal process. For example, I commenced legal proceedings against a tenant at the end of January, and I have only just received a court order requiring possession in 2 weeks time. I have no doubt that the tenants will not move, so I will then have to get the bailiffs involved – more time and expense. Last time I asked, there was a two-month wait for the bailiffs. Lots of tenants know the law and play it for all it is worth.
Nevertheless, whilst the law remains as it is, I am stuck with it. I would no more force tenant out of their home illegally than I would become a vigilante hunting down my son's muggers.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
I agree with Hamish, for once, that the law is unfairly biased against landlords and in favour of tenants. That could be improved by speeding up the legal process.
That's pretty much all it would take too.
Breach the lease, hearing within 21 days, and if not corrected prior to hearing, eviction within a further 14 days.
5 weeks is a reasonable length of time for all parties concerned.
3-4 months is excessively biased in favour of the tenant.
Justice delayed is justice denied....“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
You could have added that the landlord ended up paying nearly £10,000 in damages to the wrongfully-evicted tenant in that case.
I thought people could read that short article if they were interested. The chief constable paid out 2.5K too.That could be improved by speeding up the legal process.
A lot of UK renting laws need to be amended, including the removal of Section 21. Letting a property and then asking for it back 6/12 months later under a S21, when the tenant has gone to the expense of moving in, finding schools, etc, needs to be stopped too.
What we need is to attract the more professional landlord who really is in it for the long term; instant set rent reductions where the landlord fails to do his repairs in a specified time; ban on landlords who have certain criminal convictions; ban on landlords who have been bankrupt and much speedier evicitions of those tenants who don't pay their rent or wreck the place.
The UK has a lot to learn on renting laws from some of our European cousins, where renting is ofter preferred over buying because their laws make it a pleasant experience and cheaper option for a tenant.
I hope your son is ok?RENTING? Have you checked to see that your landlord has permission from their mortgage lender to rent the property? If not, you could be thrown out with very little notice.
Read the sticky on the House Buying, Renting & Selling board.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »If you don't like the housing laws, then don't be a landlord.
If you don't like tenancy agreements, don't want to pay the rent and want to sublet without permission, don't be surprised if the LL ignores the law as much as you've ignored your tenancy.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »ban on landlords who have been bankrupt
What does that have to do with anything? I've been bankrupt - 2001. What bearing does that have on my suitability to be a LL in 2012?0 -
Some of you are rather judgemental and very unsympathetic. OK, the OP has admitted to having been a particularly poor tenant and if I were their landlord I'd be glad to see the back of them as well BUT they have been locked out of their home and their possessions held to ransom. I'd be looking to have a locksmith round to the property to let me back in, and then wait for the landlord to gain possession in the conventional and correct way.
Bad tenants are an inevitable consequence of the sort of business this landlord has chosen to engage in. Let him run his business properly without illegally resorting to turfing people out onto the streets.0 -
Notmyrealname wrote: »If you don't like tenancy agreements, don't want to pay the rent and want to sublet without permission, don't be surprised if the LL ignores the law as much as you've ignored your tenancy.
Fortunately, the law doesn't agree with you. In the link I gave, the LL had to pay nearly 10k to her ex tenant.Notmyrealname wrote: »What does that have to do with anything? I've been bankrupt - 2001. What bearing does that have on my suitability to be a LL in 2012?
Some professions ban those who have been bankrupt and landlords should be included on that list, because if you walk away from your debts again, then the tenant and their family will be affected.
Even some insurers ask if you have ever been bankrupt or whether anyone else in the house has been bankrupt, before they give a quote.RENTING? Have you checked to see that your landlord has permission from their mortgage lender to rent the property? If not, you could be thrown out with very little notice.
Read the sticky on the House Buying, Renting & Selling board.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »A lot of UK renting laws need to be amended, including the removal of Section 21. Letting a property and then asking for it back 6/12 months later under a S21, when the tenant has gone to the expense of moving in, finding schools, etc, needs to be stopped too.
What you are looking for is an Assured Tenancy, rather than an AST. Unfortunately, private landlords are not prepared to grant an Assured Tenancy, for obvious reasons. You need to find a Housing Association tenancy to get an AT.
These things seem to go in cycles. You start with the position in Victorian times, which was totally in favour of the landlord. Then, around the 1950s, the government provided protection for tenants. They could not be evicted at all, and the rents were capped at low levels. This was of course a disaster for landlords. You can still buy properties today with protected tenants, and they go for about 50% of the price of an equivalent empty property.
That legislation led to an almost complete drying up of the private rented sector. If you let your property to a tenant, there was a good chance you could never get it back again. I remember my parents, who were doctors, had a flat above their surgery. They were only prepared to let that to visiting academics, on the basis that they were bound sooner or later to go back home again.
Rents were very high, to reflect the risk.
Then, Thatcher introduced Assured ShortHold Tenancies, and the private rented sector started booming again, especially as rents remained high compared to house prices. But now you are complaining that this gives landlords the chance to turf tenants out after too short a time......No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
The only "too short a time" is 6 months. It really should be 12 months. Most landline, broadband, gas and electricity contracts run for 12 months and so should tenancies...but that's only my opinion. Then more of my opinion should allow late payment of rent to appear on a credit report. Less people would pay late then wouldn't they for fear of damage to their credit report.W But now you are complaining that this gives landlords the chance to turf tenants out after too short a time......:footie:
Regular savers earn 6% interest (HSBC, First Direct, M&S) Loans cost 2.9% per year (Nationwide) = FREE money. 0 -
I look forward to to the day all the pro-evictees in this thread find themselves defending an illegal evitcion charge of their own.I'm not bad at golf, I just get better value for money when I take more shots!0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards