City council unanimously backs government plans to ditch Section 21

A city council is calling on the Government to abolish Section 21 – so-called ‘no fault evictions’.

The Government is currently consulting on its plans to ditch Section 21.

Labour-controlled Norwich City Council this week unanimously agreed that its leader, Alan Waters, should write to the Government backing the abolition.

Beth Jones, Labour councillor who tabled the motion, said: “Section 21 haunts those in the private sector with an assured shorthold tenancy.

“With often only a six month tenancy they can, through no fault of their own, be forced out of a house that became home, where they have put down roots, in only a matter of weeks.

“Section 21 is the rogue landlord’s trump card. Without any good reason, or even reason at all, a landlord can apply for Section 21, forcing the tenant out in a matter of weeks with no redress.”

The city council recently ordered all 25 tenants to leave a block of apartments for their own safety.

The flats, at St Faith’s Lane, were said to have had a number of problems. Tenants had also complained about deposits not being returned. They also said that local agents had marketed the properties.

Cllr Jones said: “We’ve taken decisive and significant action to protect private renters in Norwich, but abolishing Section 21, which the Government needs to do, would be an enormous help.

“This motion adds to the campaign and movement which is growing in our city and nationally on this important issue.”

Norwich is not the first or only council to back the Government’s plans to abolish Section 21. Hackney Council, in London, voted in July to support the abolition.

The consultation ends on October 12 and can be found at:

Iamproperty end of news story

Email the story to a friend


  1. Jrsteeve

    Hi Norwich City Council, can you please reveal your plans to increase the local authority housing stock to replace the private landlords who’ll be exiting the market in your area?

    Landlords need a clear cut way of removing tenants when a genuine issue arises – arrears, tenancy breaches etc – as Section 8 is just too unreliable.

  2. jeremy1960

    Section 21 may be the rogue landlords trump card, but, it is often the most certain route for good genuine landlords to regain THEIR PROPERTY from ROGUE TENANTS!

    1. Gromit

      Rogue Landlords don’t use Sec.21 they use strong arm tactics, intimidation, and threats.

      It is the good law abiding Landlords that will be affected, and who will leave the PRS, leaving………. just rogue Landlords.

  3. hertsagent13

    @jeremy1960. Surely there are no rogue tenants in England?  The Governments Tenant Fees Act guidance as good as told me so, there can only be bad landlords in England now!

  4. Will2

    Another left wing ROGUE council interfering in matters where they have no power. Yet another rogue councillor expressing opinions on something they clearly do not have a full understanding of and probably a council that incites contempt of court advising leaving tenants to breach court orders by insisting they stay until bailiffs arrive,  as most seem to. Let landlords exit the market so councils can provide their own social housing.  I am tired of the second rate politicians intent on attacking all landlords as rogues.  After all by their standards ALL Politicians should be classified as ROGUES if all landlords are classified as rogues.

    1. singlelayer

      Oh, they have an understanding alright…they fully understand that  every bad tenant that is evicted with a s.21 Is a tenant potentially knocking at their door cap-in-hand looking for accommodation that they do not have, but also find the tenant very difficult to turn away as the reason for the eviction is not officially stated, therefore not attributable to the tenant directly/officially. As this (and all) councils stand to ‘benefit’ from the abolition of s.21, their comments can scarcely be taken as impartial or without bias – unconscious or otherwise.

      1. AgentQ73

        Absolutely bang on the money

  5. JMK

    The lunacy of some people simply astounds me.

    “a landlord can apply for Section 21, forcing the tenant out in a matter of weeks” is clearly rubbish.  Where do these idiots get their information?  Any sort of ‘force’ requires bailiffs and that takes months.

    Norwich City Council will have themselves to blame when their homelessness issue increases.

  6. JamesB

    Of course they back it, it will stop all of the bad tenants who get thrown out the private rented sector coming to them for properties

  7. GeorgeHammond78

    I don’t get the linkage in this article between the S21 nonsense and what happened at the block of flats that had to be cleared. If you read the back numbers on the flats, you’ll see some scummy ‘entrepreneur’ converted a crappy office block into a set of even crappier flats which were let on licence to mostly migrant workers, having been disgracefully aided and abetted by local agents. Rightly, the council had to clear them but where does a ‘rogue landlord’ misusing S21 come into the picture? Given the licensing arrangements, even if they had wished to, said landlord in this case – who indeed appears to be a genuine rogue – couldn’t have used S21 anyway.

    Interestingly, Rightmove shows that this particular block, now boarded up, as being listed for sale as a development opportunity. And, listed by one of the same agents who were letting them. Clearly they have no shame!


  8. NotAdoctor32

    Has anyone asked the councillor what the logic is for any landlord to evict a good tenant before the end of their contract is?  Where does the LL benefit?

    Obviously, if they are selling the property it is their property to sell, but do these people think that swathes of good tenants are being evicted for no reason whatsoever?

    1. Will2

      If you are a left wing anti landlord councillor you may not have the ability to carry out normal reasoning.

    2. Home Provider

      Section 21 does not allow a landlord to evict any tenant – good or bad – before the end of their contract, i.e. before the end of the initial fixed term.

  9. Rob Gilbertson

    “Without any good reason, or even reason at all, a landlord can apply for Section 21, forcing the tenant out in a matter of weeks with no redress”


    why would a Landlord want an empty property for no reason?

    1. Rent Rebel

      why would the landlord want an empty property for no reason? 

      No-one said they do, silly. What they want is the tenant out, without reason or redress.

      1. Deltic2130

        But presumably for some reason??

  10. Snyper

    A landlord doesn’t simply serve a section 21 on a tenant without good reason – S21 is hardly the actions of a ‘rogue’ landlord as they say. These people seem to forget that the property belongs to the landlord?

    On another note, the council around here will advise a tenant to stay in a property beyond their term and become squatters! Not people I’d be wanting advise from…

    1. Rent Rebel

      A landlord doesn’t simply serve a section 21 on a tenant without good reason –
      Then they won’t struggle to provide that reason if s21 is ended then.

      1. Deltic2130

        Except that the perfectly valid reason – screaming abuse at the neighbours or shi**ing all over the floor – is not usually enough to win S8, if indeed the offence committed is even covered at all in a S8 ground. What if it isn’t?

  11. IWONDER36

    Labour-controlled, or Socialist controlled?


    There’s a difference, even if the lines are blurred.

  12. markus

    ‘A matter of weeks’?????? My A%$8!

    I’ve finally taken possession of a property under section 21 and it’s taken FIVE MONTHS from issue of S21. An action we took only after he had been given chance after chance after chance to bring his rent up to date. Now we are 9 months rent amiss (£4500.00), plus the court costs (and bailiff costs as he didn’t obey the court order, let alone the S21 date), plus the cost to clear the property, store his belongings for the next month (and then dispose of them), clean the property throughout and cut and clear the garden.

    But yes, tell me all about these rogue landlords abusing S21 and throwing people out in a matter of weeks….

  13. thepiper777

    I’ve been a landlord, tenant and have run a multi branch letting agency, so I see this argument from a number of angles.

    The bottom line is S.21 notices are grossly unfair. No tenant should live in fear that their landlord can, for no good reason, evict them.

    As landlords we should recognise that we provide people with homes. It is a basic human right to have some form of security in that home as tenants in most other western societies have.

    Other comments about landlords leaving the sector… fine, make room for more responsible landlords who recognise that owning a property which provides a home for a person or family carries with it a responsibility. If you don’t get that, please do leave the sector.

    Complaints about it taking too long to evict bad tenants don’t mean we as landlords should have a right to evict any tenant. By abolishing S.21 notices the courts can focus their time and resources on evictions which are justified. No-one is saying landlords should have no right to evict a tenant.

    And as for the claim that landlords wouldn’t evict a tenant without good reason, it really depends on your definition of ‘good reason’. There have been countless cases of landlords evicting tenants who ask for repairs to be done… that’s the type of thing the abolition of S.21 notices will stop. It shouldn’t have any affect on the eviction of tenants who don’t pay rent, or damage the property.

    I have yet to read a persuasive argument to justify S.21 notices or any claim that they are fair. “It’s my property.” is an argument I have heard used to justify neglecting repairs and even to justify entering a rented property without giving the tenant notice and I am sure the majority of landlords wouldn’t agree with this. In the same way it’s not a justification for overriding the basic human right of security in one’s home.

    1. RoyB

      In 20 years I have just served my first section 21 on a tenant of 6 years plus standing. His rent is usually on time – not too worried if he is late. I got bills for boiler repairs – which were because he had run out of oil. I got call out charges from electricians and plumbers who had agreed with him, through the agents, to do repairs at specified time. Boiler engineers refused to carry on working at the property if he was around. Property access denied at short notice after agreeing a week in advance. Garden is completely overgrown – was a nice garden when he moved in. Gate blew off its hinges – said they were rotten- – nice shiny galvanised still. Neighbours complained about gate slamming in the wind plus a whole lot of other stuff ( including ivy going up to the gutters. All stuff which was mentioned to him).So I am a rogue landlord by your definition? ps due to the amount of bad press lanlords are getting this landlord who never ever increase the rent for existing tenants and would willingly write off a months rent to help tenants through a bad patch- will probably sell this house – and the others as they become vacant.

  14. Deltic2130

    Let’s hope Norwich and any of its housing subsidiaries aren’t using S21 themselves then eh?

    Couldn’t have them ‘doing a Camden’ and claiming to be part of the anti-S21 campaign whilst continuing to use it themselves now, could we?

  15. Ian Narbeth

    Abolishing s21 will also make it practically impossible for landlords to evict some anti-social tenants because the neighbours, who are adversely affected by the tenant, will be too frightened to give evidence. The interests of the weak and the vulnerable will be subordinated or sacrificed to those of the thug and the bully. Is that what you want, Norwich City Council?

    1. RoyB

      Yes – cos we don’t want them as tenants either.

  16. PossessionFriendUK39

    I’ve sent a detailed letter to the Norwich Press, see it on ;  

    Basically, I’m calling for any landlords with knowledge of Norwich’s murky dealings with its own tenants.

    You’ll also see in the linked article that I’ve  de-bunked the  Shelter manta that Norwich has adopted that tenants can be chucked out i weeks with a Section 21.


You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.