Facing eviction, a few questions

BitterAndTwisted

Actually, I don't think I'm giving bad advice at all. I suggest you look up the conditions for issuing a Section 8 Notice, paying particular attention to grounds 8, 10 and 11.

I'll give you a summary for your convenience:

Ground 8: the tenant owes at least two months in rent (monthly tenancies) both on service of notice and at the time of the court hearing. Where rent is payable weekly, quarterly or annually ground 8 requires that there are arrears of 8 weeks, 3 months and 6 months respectively. (Which is what I was referring to in my previous post).


Ground 10: the tenant was in arrears when the landlord served notice and when court proceedings began. (I suspect that this is where your one-quid-owing example came in).


Ground 11: the tenant has been persistently behind and inconsistent with rent payments.


Threatening court, being awarded possession and enforcing it are entirely different things.


In the OP's friend's situation I would be very surprised indeed if the landlord secured possession based on the facts at hand.


You might "work in this field" but I suspect your own experience is more likely to be closer to a filing-clerk's than a legal professional's.

Delree

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Actually, I don't think I'm giving bad advice at all. I suggest you look up the conditions for issuing a Section 8 Notice, paying particular attention to grounds 8, 10 and 11.

I'll give you a summary for your convenience:

Ground 8: the tenant owes at least two months in rent (monthly tenancies) both on service of notice and at the time of the court hearing. Where rent is payable weekly, quarterly or annually ground 8 requires that there are arrears of 8 weeks, 3 months and 6 months respectively. (Which is what I was referring to in my previous post).


Ground 10: the tenant was in arrears when the landlord served notice and when court proceedings began. (I suspect that this is where your one-quid-owing example came in).


Ground 11: the tenant has been persistently behind and inconsistent with rent payments.


Threatening court, being awarded possession and enforcing it are entirely different things.


In the OP's friend's situation I would be very surprised indeed if the landlord secured possession based on the facts at hand.


You might "work in this field" but I suspect your own experience is more likely to be closer to a filing-clerk's than a legal professional's.

Okay we're talking about slightly different things, thank goodness for that.

You're referring to a "notice to quit" where as I was referring to a "notice of seeking possession". This is the first step in the process and most certainly can be served before 8 weeks rent is due.

Nothing to see here.

BitterAndTwisted

There is no such thing as a "notice to quit"!. There is only a "notice of seeking possession" either under Section 21 or Section 8 of the housing act.

A Section 8 Notice has a number of mandatory grounds, but number 8 is the only one which pertains to rent owed. Grounds 10 & 11 are discretionary only and are by their very nature not guaranteed to succeed in court. I don't believe any court would grant possession for a quid's-worth of arrears.

pmlindyloo

There is an excellent guide here:

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/help_with_money/rent_arrears/rent_arrears_in_social_housing

OP, you seemed to have missed the part about HB paying the full rent for 13 weeks if you haven't claimed HB in the last year.

Delree

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

There is no such thing as a "notice to quit"!. There is only a "notice of seeking possession" either under Section 21 or Section 8 of the housing act.

A Section 8 Notice has a number of mandatory grounds, but number 8 is the only one which pertains to rent owed. Grounds 10 & 11 are discretionary only and are by their very nature not guaranteed to succeed in court. I don't believe any court would grant possession for a quid's-worth of arrears.

I'm not saying they would I'm just pointing out that the court hears cases where the rent arrears are below 8 weeks at the time.

They wouldn't award outright possession in 99% of cases but would still award a suspended order in most cases.

Here is actually what the notice stipulates:

Rent is unpaid when the notice seeking possession is served, and at the time of the hearing for a Possession Order:

Rent is paid weekly or fortnightly and at least eight weeks' rent is owed.

Rent is paid monthly and at least two months' rent is owed.

Rent is paid quarterly and at least one quarter's rent is more than three months overdue.

Rent is paid yearly and at least three months' rent is more than three months overdue.

The part in bold is crucial as it allows landlords to serve notice before eight weeks. Dispute it if you like but it happens and it stands up in court.
So whilst outright possession is unlikely (and probably unlawful) below 8 weeks the court will still hear the case and grant something along the way.

So go on giving bad advice to people, letting them believe they are safe so long as they always make sure they're 7 weeks in arrears not 8.

Kynthia

Delree wrote: »

I'm not saying they would I'm just pointing out that the court hears cases where the rent arrears are below 8 weeks at the time.

They wouldn't award outright possession in 99% of cases but would still award a suspended order in most cases.

Here is actually what the notice stipulates:

Rent is unpaid when the notice seeking possession is served, and at the time of the hearing for a Possession Order:

Rent is paid weekly or fortnightly and at least eight weeks' rent is owed.

Rent is paid monthly and at least two months' rent is owed.

Rent is paid quarterly and at least one quarter's rent is more than three months overdue.

Rent is paid yearly and at least three months' rent is more than three months overdue.

The part in bold is crucial as it allows landlords to serve notice before eight weeks. Dispute it if you like but it happens and it stands up in court.
So whilst outright possession is unlikely (and probably unlawful) below 8 weeks the court will still hear the case and grant something along the way.

So go on giving bad advice to people, letting them believe they are safe so long as they always make sure they're 7 weeks in arrears not 8.

I think you are being unfair to someone who is giving correct and factual information. B&T is correct in saying that there is no such thing as a 'notice to quit' only posession notices S8 and S21. B&T is correct in saying that a S8 cannot be served until 2 months rent is owed, it's not just at the court date that this amount must be owed. Also I think you might be misunderstanding when we say 2 months of rent must be owed. Owed is not the same as arrears, as 2 months is owed the day after the second month's rent should have been paid (ie. 1 month and 1 day of non-payment). Therefore B&T is not saying that tenants only have to keep under 2 months (or 8 weeks) of rent arrears to avoid eviction.

Delree

Kynthia wrote: »

I think you are being unfair to someone who is giving correct and factual information. B&T is correct in saying that there is no such thing as a 'notice to quit' only posession notices S8 and S21. B&T is correct in saying that a S8 cannot be served until 2 months rent is owed, it's not just at the court date that this amount must be owed. Also I think you might be misunderstanding when we say 2 months of rent must be owed. Owed is not the same as arrears, as 2 months is owed the day after the second month's rent should have been paid (ie. 1 month and 1 day of non-payment). Therefore B&T is not saying that tenants only have to keep under 2 months (or 8 weeks) of rent arrears to avoid eviction.

Fair point but I still think B&T is giving misleading advice which is still bad. I don't think he/she is doing it on purpose and do not doubt his/her integrity but the advice he/she is giving flies in the face of what actually happens.

BitterAndTwisted

We're not allowed to give advice on this forum as it's against the rules. All any of us are doing are voicing our opinions, sometimes based on written evidence or links from reliable sources.

The source I gave on the other thread about a tenant being threatened with possession from a social landlord was from Shelter's website, so I dunno how much more reliable you would want the evidence to be. We only have your word for it that you "work in the field".

Delree

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

We're not allowed to give advice on this forum as it's against the rules. All any of us are doing are voicing our opinions, sometimes based on written evidence or links from reliable sources.

The source I gave on the other thread about a tenant being threatened with possession from a social landlord was from Shelter's website, so I dunno how much more reliable you would want the evidence to be. We only have your word for it that you "work in the field".

Apologies B&T sorry if I offended you, because I work in the field I get emotive. As I say I don't doubt your integrity and believe this forum would be poorer without you.