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

[sequenci]

Am I right in understanding that they would need to serve a notice to quit, and once expired they can seek an eviction order?

 

Or is there something I'm missing?

 

Thanks in advance

[Beatrice Bee]

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.

[mariner51]

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?

[Lea_HTH]

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).

[Beatrice Bee]

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.'

[Lea_HTH]

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.

[mariner51]

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.

[sequenci]

 

 

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.

[fletch70]

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.

[fletch70]

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

 

And laws change and evolve.

[Beatrice Bee]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49049[/ATTACH]

[Beatrice Bee]

"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."

[speedfreek]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49049[/ATTACH]

 

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.

 

Edit:

 

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.

[Lea_HTH]

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.

[Lea_HTH]

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.

[Annie71]

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.

[mariner51]

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?

[sequenci]

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.

[Annie71]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?416914-Deposit-protection.&p=4464334#post4464334

 

Own thread started as requested although it looks confusing