Section 42 uplift (HCEO) evictions, I want to start a campaign. Who's in?

Jr1871

Hi all, as somebody who has helped a number of people facing eviction cases (usually in the residential letting genre) I am seeing a significant increase in landlords obtaining section 42 uplifts to High Court enforcement, meaning in most cases tenants think they are being evicted on a certain date via County Court bailiffs, when the result of the HCEO uplift means almost immediate eviction with no notice (sure most people know this) when I am defending, I always ask that the judge specifically dis-allows the uplift, by being armed with details about the local County Courts bailiff waiting list, and have only failed in this once.

Clearly, all HCEO companies resist any kind of notice, as a large % of warrant suspension applications would be successful.

I think this is a scandal, and an unfair loophole. If uplifts are granted by the court on initial application, or at a later date, a notice period of 14 days should surely apply?

Who is interested in working with me to expose this fully, and campaign against the current way things are done?

Thanks for reading,


Jon.

forgotmyname

Is this what happened on the Can't pay TV show? several tennants being evicted because (they think) the landlord wanted to rent them to the council for emergency housing as they will get more rent money.

Tennants all upto date on the rent with no arrears etc and knew nothing of the high court enforcement coming round to evict them that day.

Jr1871

Yes. It is a route being used more and more, either to enforce 8/21 evictions usually, both for arrears etc, and also redevelopment. I live rurally, and am seeing the uplift as a standard clause in eviction papers from agents, and increasingly private landlords.

mrginge

At what point in an eviction process does the tenant lose their right to occupy the property?

Is it when the bailiffs turn up or when the judge makes the order?

martinsurrey

Jr1871 wrote: »

almost immediate eviction with no notice (sure most people know this)

I think you're being a bit dramatic there, to get to the court the tenants have had MONTHS of notice (depending on what grounds the eviction is on).

And more than that, if its on rent arrears grounds, I fail to see how its unfair on the landlord to seek the most timely method of getting his asset back, which is being effectively stolen from him.

Nobbie1967

I don't see the point in this, by the time High Court Enforcement Officers are involved, the tenants will have had plenty of notice that the landlord wants them out. Why not focus the campaign on the use of no fault S21 and see if the timescales for these can be extended.

I don't think extending the time to evict those who don't pay their rent is really improving the situation for most tenants who pay on time.

LandyAndy

OP, I love your sig.

Hater of injustice.......

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Stevie_Palimo

Perhaps you could start an e-petition here with a view to have this brought up in parliament, I believe you would get such a large number of signatures if you go about this right.

[Deleted User]

The problem is.., the way evictions are handled for the most vulnerable.

Yes a tenant has months of notice that the LL wants the property back. So if they have problems getting another tenancy because of a lack of LL's who will accept benefit tenants, lack of money etc, they go to the council and the council says 'ok, come back when you've received a bailiffs warrant'. The Possession order is granted, the tenant is waiting to take the bailiff papers to the council, and the LL goes to the High Court (paying a lot of extra money) to get a quicker eviction through High Court Sheriffs. The tenants wake up one morning to find Sheriffs and a locksmith at the door, they are given an hour to pack up and move out.

But they have been told by their Housing Department that they have weeks to go. Don't know what to pack up because they don't know where they are going (what goes into storage if they can afford it, what goes with them to emergency housing).

Then the sheriffs turn up, telling them they have to go with an hours notice to Housing to say they've actually been evicted, only have access to their possessions left in the house via the LL or Sheriff because the locks were changed.., and they had no idea the eviction (being locked out) was or could happen so quickly.., so are totally unprepared.

You don't get it unless you are in this position.., being told the LL wants the property back is good warning to move out if you can actually move on somewhere. If you can't.., its not so easy. And you are subject to what your local housing department will do. Usually they do nothing til the Bailiff's or sheriffs are at the door.

So yes, I agree the LL should be able to use High Court Sheriffs to evict, but the tenant should be told this route to eviction is being taken. They shouldn't find out when the sheriffs are at the door.

I am in this position.., two children with ASD, housing will do nothing until I have a bailiff's warrant. Won't give me a higher banding, won't make a homeless application.., nada. No idea what to do about putting stuff into storage because I could be evicted in 10 weeks.,. or a month. And no idea whether I'll be going into B&B, or what sort of emergency accommodation.

When I phoned the guy I see in Housing last week, just to ask if anything was being done with his manager (because I wrote making a case against being allocated to one room shared lettings and need housing to write to a hostel I was in some years ago - manager needs to ok this). I was told my case wasn't even being looked at (in spite of my efforts to prepare what I could in advance) because he had five people being evicted that week - so our case was a long way down the 'action' list. And that was on Bailiff's warrants so more warning. God knows what happens if a Sheriff turns up with an hour to go before you have to be out the house.

martinsurrey

deannatrois wrote: »

...they go to the council and the council says 'ok, come back when you've received a bailiffs warrant'. The Possession order is granted, the tenant is waiting to take the bailiff papers to the council, and the LL goes to the High Court


...But they have been told by their Housing Department that they have weeks to go...

...and they had no idea the eviction (being locked out) was or could happen so quickly.., so are totally unprepared...

...And you are subject to what your local housing department will do. Usually they do nothing til the Bailiff's or sheriffs are at the door...

So yes, I agree the LL should be able to use High Court Sheriffs to evict, but the tenant should be told this route to eviction is being taken. They shouldn't find out when the sheriffs are at the door.

I think the problem lies not in how the LL is acting, but in how the Housing department is acting.

The LL knows that the tenants cant move until the council will help, and if they wont help until a bailiff is at the door, they'll get one there as fast as possible, as its costing them a fortune in the meantime.

But then from the councils point of view, they have limited resources and they want to delay the provision of emergency housing for as long as possible, so maybe a better education system for people being evicted, warning them of the possibility of a high court eviction and what to do if this happens is the way forward.

silvercar

It seems that the tenant has lots of notice, from the section 21/ 8 notice, from the court papers etc What then happens is the tenant waits for further action. This will often be the eviction. Whether it is quick via High Court or slow via County court, the council will be dealing with urgent cases first. So the tenant waits until some sort of bailiff arrives. By the sound of it, even with a county court bailiff eviction, the council does nothing until the bailiffs arrive. So the only difference seems to be whether that is days or weeks or months after the court approved the eviction.

Now if that time gap (between court judgement and the appearance of bailiffs) was time that was used by the tenant to find alternative accommodation or by the council to source suitable properties, then I can understand that there is a case for giving the tenant time. What actually happens in the majority of cases is that tenant is not sourcing alternative accommodation and is just waiting for the council to take action. The council takes no action until eviction is imminent, so in both cases the tenant has little notice of eviction.

If it was the case that tenants were actively sourcing their next home from the minute they knew they were being evicted, then I can understand there needs to be time, but the tenants aren't. Time and time again tenants do nothing but wait for the council. I accept that for some tenants their chance of a private let are slim, for others it is a gamble, of being homeless to boost up the waiting list to help secure a council/ HA secure tenancy.