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!
What Happens If You Leave A Property Ahead Of The Bailiffs
Comments
-
-
Many landlords and letting agents serve the section 21 notice as routine to all their tenants (Sword of Damocles). Several landlords on here and landlord zone argue that the section 21 has no effect on a tenancy and that a tenant isn't even entitled to leave at the end of the section 21 notice period. They state that the tenant must serve their own notice as well. Yet when a landlord actually wants the tenant to leave they are all so often up in arms that the tenant stays past the section 21 notice period. (My view is that a tenant can leave at the end of the section 21 notice period and do not need to serve their own notice).
Not surprising councils do not act on presentation of a section 21 notice even if valid. It's devalued currency now that they are served so often to all and sundry. If they were used only when the landlord intended the tenant should leave perhaps they would carry more weight. Until then landlords can't have it both ways.0 -
Indeed. As I said.jjlandlord wrote: »This is not why they do it... Councils have a choice and they decide the way they act.
Why do they decide the way they do? Read my first post for the explanation.0 -
Indeed. As I said.
Why do they decide the way they do? Read my first post for the explanation.
No, you missed my point.
Your post does not explain, it is just the standard PR statement that a council would provide.
They could perfectly re-house when the court order is issued* but they decide to save a bit at the expense of both the vulnerable tenant and the landlord.
Politically (because that is the reason) there is no pressure on them to act otherwise.
They are perfectly able to splash the cash when they decide to, either when it serves a political purpose or simply when it serves them personally.
Am I cynical? Yes.
But this strategy used by the councils is no less cynical.
* I agree that acting on a s.21 is rather pointless considering how these notices are used.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
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards