Illegal Sublet

Jumblebumble

Jumblebumble said:

Can anyone kindly advise on the following situation (UK)
A landlord has let a flat to a tenant who was on a rollover
The tenant is from overseas and has gone back home
They have given notice that expires 7 July
Everything was above board deposit protected etc
The landlord went to do an inspection last week and found a young family living there who upon questioning were under the impression that the Landlord was the tenant.
They knew they were suppose to vacate on 7 July but asked if they could stay for another 3 months
The landlord who has read far too many times people on here  encouraging tenants not to stick to the agreements they have made  has told them no chance 
The landlord wishes to refurbish the flat by removing the kitchen on July 8th

Can any one advise what might happen if the "squatters" are still there on July 8th and the Landlord wishes them to be out ?

Just thought you might like an update
The Tenant gave the subtenant an AST including claiming to have protected the deposit
The subtenant contacted the landlord and had been there for 18 months and had proved they had paid on time the whole time
The landlord sent the tenant to his letting agent who conducted the necessary checks and signed up the tenant for a 12 month tenancy
Every one went away happy

Sunsaru

We like a happy ending!

GeordieGeorge

user1977 said:

Jumblebumble said:

Jumblebumble said:

Can anyone kindly advise on the following situation (UK)
A landlord has let a flat to a tenant who was on a rollover
The tenant is from overseas and has gone back home
They have given notice that expires 7 July
Everything was above board deposit protected etc
The landlord went to do an inspection last week and found a young family living there who upon questioning were under the impression that the Landlord was the tenant.
They knew they were suppose to vacate on 7 July but asked if they could stay for another 3 months
The landlord who has read far too many times people on here  encouraging tenants not to stick to the agreements they have made  has told them no chance 
The landlord wishes to refurbish the flat by removing the kitchen on July 8th

Can any one advise what might happen if the "squatters" are still there on July 8th and the Landlord wishes them to be out ?

The landlord believes that Lycra is correct and that the sub tenants are trespassers and that as per the CAB page no possession order is needed. 

They'd still need a warrant to evict them though (not sure if that's been misunderstood).

Why? They have no right to be there, they can surely just be escorted off the premises like any unwanted guests.

[Deleted User]

All is well that ends well. 

macman

user1977 said:

Jumblebumble said:

Jumblebumble said:

Can anyone kindly advise on the following situation (UK)
A landlord has let a flat to a tenant who was on a rollover
The tenant is from overseas and has gone back home
They have given notice that expires 7 July
Everything was above board deposit protected etc
The landlord went to do an inspection last week and found a young family living there who upon questioning were under the impression that the Landlord was the tenant.
They knew they were suppose to vacate on 7 July but asked if they could stay for another 3 months
The landlord who has read far too many times people on here  encouraging tenants not to stick to the agreements they have made  has told them no chance 
The landlord wishes to refurbish the flat by removing the kitchen on July 8th

Can any one advise what might happen if the "squatters" are still there on July 8th and the Landlord wishes them to be out ?

The landlord believes that Lycra is correct and that the sub tenants are trespassers and that as per the CAB page no possession order is needed. 

They'd still need a warrant to evict them though (not sure if that's been misunderstood).

Why would you need to carry out an eviction unless the occupants are legal tenants? Unless a tenancy has been created (and it can be contended that if it was, it is void because the original tenancy prohibited sub-letting), they are simply unauthorised occupiers and reasonable force can be used to remove them.
The term 'eviction' can only be used in a legal sense when there is an actual tenancy in the first place.