Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I have found this group very helpful hence I am here seeking help and advice.   I got myself into a situation where I have now more than £50k in unsecured debts (personal loans & credit cards) and things are now getting out of control as I am struggling to make payments. This is purely my own created situation and I am taking 100% responsibility for it. I am keen to get out of this situation as soon as possible hence I would appreciate any help and advice in this process. I am employed at the moment and don’t want to risk going into IVA or bankruptcy as this would risk losing my job. Being sole bread earner of my family, I cannot afford to lose my job. I have been trying to keep up with the payments so far and had few missed payments instances until 3/4 months ago but got caught up with missed payments somehow using my savings. All my debts are still with original lenders. However I know I am getting into same situation again shortly and won’t be able to get out of it again. I have started exploring Debt Management Plan (DMP) option through StepChange but haven’t submitted it yet. Based on budgeting, I have around £820 available to make payments to all lenders after taking care of all other essential expenses. This is definitely lot more affordable than what I am currently paying to different lenders. 1. Is DMP right option for me in current situation? 2. what are the negative consequences of availing DMP? 3. is there something else that I can do to get out of this situation? I’m determined to clear out all my debts but need bit of breathing space and time. Let me know please if you need any additional information. Thanks in advance for all your help and guidance. MM  
    • Bookmakers use betting on political events to entice new customers, and say it is growing.View the full article
    • nope  and  neither dx
    • Ok Thank you DX will do just that . will keep you up dated.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.


      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

What would a landlord need to do to evict someone who is on a periodic tenancy once their AST has finished?

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3781 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then


Please click the "Report " link


at the bottom of one of the posts.


If you want to post a new story then


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

A Section 21 notice is what you serve. Two months clear notice which expires on the last day of the period of the tenancy and you seek possession after that day.

In the covering letter let the tenants know that if they are still there when the notice expires, you will commence possession proceedings to get a possession order to evict them and they will be liable for court fees.


Section 8 can be used as well. Here the notice is 14 days because it is for serious rent arrears, as well as for possession [has to be at least 8 weeks arrears when the notice is served]. However, tenants can slow this one down considerably with a counter claim for disrepair or non protection of tenancy deposit. We talking 6 months delay.


Section 21 notice is defective if at the time of service the tenancy deposit is not protected. To get possession with a Section 8, tenant has to be at least 8 weeks late at the time of the service of the notice and also at the time of the court hearing, otherwise the judge has discretion and may allow tenant to stay provided keeps up paying the rent as well as paying back arrears in agreed instalments.


Keep proof of posting and copy of the notice. If they do not sign for recorded delivery, it will be returned to you so first just post it first class, and keep a certificate of posting. You can serve one copy witnessed by whoever you choose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LLs cannot serve Notice to Quit, only s21 to seek repossession after expiry of Notice only after repo Order has been granted can you use bailiffs to evict if Ts remain in residence beyond the Court order date.



With 8 years membership and a member of the site team, I assume you know how to search the Forum for relevant posts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Section 8 can be used as well. Here the notice is 14 days because it is for serious rent arrears, as well as for possession [has to be at least 8 weeks arrears when the notice is served]. However, tenants can slow this one down considerably with a counter claim for disrepair or non protection of tenancy deposit. We talking 6 months delay.


A s8 notice can be served for a variety of reasons, not just rent arrears. There are actually 17 grounds, eight of which are mandatory, which means the judge will have absolutely no discretion but to award possession if the ground is made out. The other 9 are discretionary. The periods of time for the notice depend on the ground used and can vary from issuing notice and filing in court on the same day, to two months.


A ground 8 claim cannot be 'slowed down' with a counter claim for disrepair or non-TDS compliance. TDS has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on a s8 claim - that has to be made separately. A g8 claim made out on the day notice is served and on the day of the hearing is MANDATORY.


Sequenci, you may be better off stating what you'd like to do and give details of the tenancy type, when it was started, whether deposit was protected, whether there are any breaches of the agreement by the tenant etc., as there may be specific grounds you can use rather than just a s21.


If there is nothing untoward, then the easiest way is a s21 - make sure you get the dates correct - or, if the LL wants to move back into the property because it was his home, then a s8 ground 1 will work equally as well. Unless the tenant has exeptional hardship factors, a s21 using accelerated proceedings should have them out within about a month of the notice ending, so long as you file for possession the day after the notice expires (case is decided on the papers without a court hearing).

Link to post
Share on other sites

With a Section 8 the LL seeks possession and possibly rent arrears. Claim form asks tenant if tenant has a counter claim. T states "LL failed to protect deposit and T intends to file a claim for statutory penalty for non-protection of deposit, which is 1-3 times the deposit paid".


LL states in claim form T owes 2 months rent. 2 months rent arrears will be reduced to one month or less if T wins counter claim: no possession will be awarded to LL if he sought possession only on grounds of rent arrears. Can list "persistently late with rent" as an additional ground.


T has to be at least 8 weeks late with the rent at the hearing, otherwise possession order not mandatory. Court has to let T make counter claim. Case management conference is listed. Next hearing date after the CM conference was in 6 months time for me so done it all 3 years ago.


Section 21 is the right thing the serve to get tenant out ASAP. A money claim for rent arrears can be made later. No guarantee that T will ever pay even if money is awarded to LL.


LL wants T out because T owes LL money. Court has to ask T if T has a money claim against LL. Some tenants might lie and state Disrepair, just to slow down the claim. T has the print out of an email asking LL to fix boiler as no heating for 2 months. T states boiler was never fixed hence T wants one months rent as compensation / damages. Court has a duty to look into it. LL may file a receipt to prove it was fixed and when.


Law aims to prevent homelessness. So does tenant. "Do you have a counter claim?" 'Yes.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

With a Section 8 the LL seeks possession and possibly rent arrears. Claim form asks tenant if tenant has a counter claim. T states "LL failed to protect deposit and T intends to file a claim for statutory penalty for non-protection of deposit, which is 1-3 times the deposit paid".


It's a separate claim. Writing it out above doesn't make it not a separate claim...two completely different tracks.


The rest of what you wrote is irrelevant. My post is correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange, I though LL&T law had developed to protect Ts from unscrupulous LLs like Rachman (1950s) and improve safety.

If the purpose is to prevent homelessness why is s21 mandatory repo allowed together with several s8 grounds?

Many Judges may be reluctant to make a T homeless immediately, hence they have discretion to suspend repo for up to 42 days, neither can they ultimately deprive LL of his property.

s8 g8 repo also allows Councils to refuse social housing on basis T made themselves 'intentionally homeless' ergo T's fault.

If the purpose of legislation is to prevent homelessness then the all Govts have failed the several thousands living rough on the streets of UK, with Council & other houses being left empty in many towns & cities.

Link to post
Share on other sites



With 8 years membership and a member of the site team, I assume you know how to search the Forum for relevant posts?


Of course, but sometimes it's just easier, and more relevant, to start a thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"This decision is wholly unsatisfactory for Landlords who took deposits in respect of

assured shorthold tenancies entered into pre-April 2007, which subsequently became

statutory periodic tenancies after 6 April 2007. On a strict interpretation of Section 215(1)

of the Housing Act, it appears insufficient for a Landlord to show an intention to comply

with Section 213 of the Housing Act 2004, by placing a deposit into an authorised

scheme late. As mooted by Lord Justice Lloyd, it is somewhat doubtful that anything

other than returning a deposit, which has not been protected, would be sufficient to

enable a Landlord to serve a valid Section 21 Notice. In cases where tenants are in

substantial rent arrears, or have caused damage to a property, a Landlord will be

reluctant to deliver back its only security."

Link to post
Share on other sites



I'll elucidate; Summary of the Superstrike vs. Rodrigues case The recent Court of Appeal case of Superstrike vs. Rodrigues concerns an assured horthold tenancy which was created in January 2007 prior to the introduction of mandatory tenancy deposit protection on 6 April 2007. The tenancy continued on a statutory periodic basis from January 2008 and the deposit remained unprotected. In 2011 a Section 21 notice was served to end the tenancy.


The Court of Appeal has ruled that when the tenancy continued on a statutory periodic basis in 2008 a new tenancy was made and a new deposit was deemed to have been received, and therefore fell under the requirements of tenancy deposit protection legislation. Having not met those requirements (to protect the deposit and serve Prescribed Information, including serving the scheme leaflet) the landlord was not entitled to serve a s21 notice.


We all wondered and knew this was the case but this ruling cleared it up until challenged.


The TDS has issued guidance on the matter https://www.tds.gb.com/resources/files/Superstrike%20v%20Rodrigues%20Scheme%20Guidance.pdf


Guidance is wrong though as not only does this fall foul of non protection it also fails on the non providing of the prescribed information within 30 days (?) set in the localism act.


Deposit must be returned in full or no valid notice can be issued. No matter what a landlord does they are open to deposit plus 3x deposit case for up to 6 years - N.B. these are being allowed by some Courts on the small claims track now.


Oh @ Beatrice Bee - a professional landlord would have known what everybody else did and protected the deposit on change from AST to PST same as they would of had to do when a new AST was granted after the TDS was incepted.




Landlords can now use a Section 21 b notice at anytime just giving 2 months notice from date of service even on a PST. They do not have to use a Section 21.4a aligned to the end of a rental period.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Superstrike has naff all to do with the s8 notice which caused the discussion in this thread!


A claim for non-TDS compliance is separate to a possession claim brought under s8. The case law has no bearing whatsover.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a tenant started the tenancy before deposit protection was required and has been on a rolling tenancy since do they need to have the deposit protected.


Yes, the law changed on 6th May 2012. All LLs with current tenants at that time had to protect the deposit within 30 days - no concessions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats interesting. I moved into my flat in Feb 2003 on an AST of 6 months. Ihave never signed a new tenancy . When I lost my job I got into a little arrears because HB is paid in arrears and not in advance. My LL served a S21 notice. We agreed a rent increase so the rent was inline with the LHA and I offered to sign a new tenancy which was refused as they would have to protect the deposit. Obviously from what you are saying the S21 was invalid . Could be interesting if and when I move out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Annie, why do you think your s21 was invalid?

Your T commenced 2003 - pre DPS, no deposit app taken.

You agreed a rent increase, LL did not require a new AST or deposit



AFAIK DPS rules only applied to ASTs requiring a deposit, in place as of Apr 2007, same for Localism Act 2012 (deadline 4 May 2012)



Perhaps you would like to start your own thread and explain further, for more advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to give you the final outcome for my initial query (as I hate it when people don't do this on their threads). My friend has agreed with the landlord to vacate at the end of Feb, they've found somewhere new to live. The landlord wishes to sell and is being quite nice about proceedings - though I will imagine my friend will get stung for the state of the place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...