Using Trespassing Law to boot tenants out

Scooby_Man

I am moving back in to a house that I have been letting - however, since the house has been sub-let, the residents in there are not the original tenants as defined in the original contract.

If in the worst case scenario these tenants don't leave, can I call the police as technically these are trespassers?

I want to focus this thread on trespassing as opposed to why I let the sub-let happen, which is something I never wanted or agreed to (its been an ordeal and discussed elsewhere, but now I just want to move into my house and get on with things).

Thanks

SM.

silvercar

I would have thought you evict your tenant through normal means (required notice, whatever section is relevent for you now wanting to use the house for yourself), as the AST was between you and your tenant. The tenant then has to give you vacant possession - taking their sub-tenants, guests and property with them.

Scooby_Man

silvercar wrote:

I would have thought you evict your tenant through normal means (required notice, whatever section is relevent for you now wanting to use the house for yourself), as the AST was between you and your tenant. The tenant then has to give you vacant possession - taking their sub-tenants, guests and property with them.

But that would be the case if the residents were the tenants as specified in the AST. Since they are not, arent they considered trespassers??

clutton_2

are they paying you rent ? and are you accepting it ? if yes and yes - then i very much think that they are tenants - under implied terms of contract legislation. you do not have to have a piece of paper (AST) to prove a tenancy exists.

even if they are not there legally - you will need a court order to get them out - the police will not just "hoik them out" on your say so - this is a civil matter, not a criminal one, therefore nothing to do with the police.

You will need specialist advice on the court procedures to apply.

if i were you, i would join NLA national landlords association - less than £100 pa - and use their legal helpline to talk you thru how to get rid of them - if you try to do it yourself and get one date wrong, the judge will throw it out, and you will have to start again.

good luck

Alleycat

Best case for you, would be to go for accelerated possesssion. Serve a section 8 quoting your grounds as being breach of tenancy (I assume the tenancy agreement you used, specified that there was to be no sub-letting). This way, rather than having to serve at least 8 weeks notice, you can serve only 2 weeks. However, if you do not have a tenancy agreement or this term is not in it, then I would assume you would have to serve a section 21 giving 8 weeks notice as there is no clause to breach. With both of these notices, you would be required to go to court for possession if tenants/subtenants do not leave.

silvercar

Scooby_Man wrote:

But that would be the case if the residents were the tenants as specified in the AST. Since they are not, arent they considered trespassers??

Leaving aside the tenants right to sub-let, they are there as a result of the actions of your tenants. Therefore your tenants should be responsible for ensuring their vacation of the property.

Consider a tenant who moves in a partner, either occasionally or permanantly; you serve notice on the tenant who vacates and takes their partner with them.

clutton_2

do you know their names ? if not - how will you issue a court summons against them ?

Scooby_Man

clutton wrote:

are they paying you rent ? and are you accepting it ? if yes and yes - then i very much think that they are tenants - under implied terms of contract legislation. you do not have to have a piece of paper (AST) to prove a tenancy exists.

even if they are not there legally - you will need a court order to get them out - the police will not just "hoik them out" on your say so - this is a civil matter, not a criminal one, therefore nothing to do with the police.

You will need specialist advice on the court procedures to apply.

if i were you, i would join NLA national landlords association - less than £100 pa - and use their legal helpline to talk you thru how to get rid of them - if you try to do it yourself and get one date wrong, the judge will throw it out, and you will have to start again.

good luck

thanks.

the rent is transferred in to my account by one of the original tenants (who is the person who has arranged the sub-let). i cant get hold of him - rumour has it he spends most of his time back in Poland, but I did catch him in person a few weeks ago and he was ok about the property being vacated when AST expires. I didn't get the chance to discuss anything further, but the important thing now is that I get possession...

Scooby_Man

clutton wrote:

do you know their names ? if not - how will you issue a court summons against them ?

This is where the trespassing thing comes in. I know the names of the people who were the original tenants and these lot cannot prove that they are them so as far as I am concerned, these are some random people who have started occupying my house - therefore trespassers. Well, thats my thinking - does it make sense?

bionic_banjo

This seems a bit confused. If you accept rent from the original tenants then that tenacy still exists - even if they have sub let the premises breaching the terms of the tenancy. You need to end that lease first. The 'sub tenants' have no legal lease with the original tenant as he has let the property in breach of the tems of his tenancy- so in law they are known as 'irregular occupiers'. they may claim to have a tenancy and rights to stay but unless they start paying you direct - they have no tenancy. So first you must formally end the tenacy with the original tenant. If the original tenant does not deliver up vacant poserssin, you can then seek peaceful reposession of the property and politely ask the people in there to leave, with a few of your friends. Alternatively you can pursue the legal route.
Not sure if trespass is really the right route for you. What you would maybe want to do is bring an action for recovery known as ejectment. You have to establish a right to immediate posession through the strength of your title to the property. There is a summary procedure for the eviction of persons in unlawful occupation of premises. 'squatters': RSC Order 113.
Hope this helps....

barnaby-bear

Scooby_Man wrote:

This is where the trespassing thing comes in. I know the names of the people who were the original tenants and these lot cannot prove that they are them so as far as I am concerned, these are some random people who have started occupying my house - therefore trespassers. Well, thats my thinking - does it make sense?

I think they are defined as squatters and they have rights, plus trespassing is a CIVIL not criminal offence I think you need legal advice from someone like the national landlord association, landlord's insurance usually offers free legal advice too.