Michael Gove pledges to end Section 21 evictions before general election

Housing secretary Michael Gove has insisted that Section 21 evictions will be “outlawed” in England by the next general election.

Michael Gove

The Conservative party‘s 2019 manifesto pledged to end the right of landlords to evict tenants without needing a reason in 2019.

However, the legislation has been continuously delayed, leading housing campaigners to question the government’s commitment.

But the government has previously said a ban cannot be enacted until the court system is improved – a position supported by the National Residential Landlords Association.

In October last year, MPs started debating the Renters (Reform) Bill, which includes a ban on Section 21 evictions in England, but the legislation has not yet completed its passage through Parliament.

Asked if he could guarantee the practice would end by the time of the next general election, which must take place by the end of January 2025, Gove told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme yesterday: “We will have outlawed it and we will have put the money into the courts in order to ensure that they can enforce that.”

Gove’s legislation has faced significant opposition from within his own party, as almost one in five Conservative MPs are also landlords. It is worth noting that there are a plethora of landlords across other political parties, including Labour.

Late last year, a series of Conservative MPs voiced their opposition to the Renters Reform Bill, saying it would add “to the burden of landlords”.

In the Commons, Conservative former minister Sir Edward Leigh told MPs: “Banning no-fault evictions will make the rental market even more stagnant and will lead to a further drying up of it.”

He added: “And apart from adding to the burden of landlords, we don’t want a situation that happened in Ireland, where the regulatory burdens on landlords is such that the rental sector has shrunk massively and governments have paid the price in terms of popularity.”

Conservative MP Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown also said the bill would have a “disastrous effect” on areas including his constituency “in reducing the number of rental properties, and therefore increasing the price of rent, and for youngsters this is really serious”.

The housing secretary also said he is doing everything he can “short of laying siege” to the chancellor’s home to persuade him to put more money into housing in the spring Budget.

Responding to Gove’s comments yesterday, Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner, who is also the party’s shadow housing secretary, said: “These are yet more weasel words from Michael Gove after years of broken promises.”

She added: “Having broken the justice system, the Tories are now using their own failure to indefinitely delay keeping their promises to renters in the most underhand way.”

Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper commented: “It is shocking that this Conservative government has repeatedly chosen to delay their promised ban on no-fault evictions.

“Michael Gove’s words will ring hollow for those who have waited for so long for this urgently needed reform.”

She added: “This government has turned a blind eye to the housing crisis in this country, 16 housing ministers later, people are still facing the same problems.

“Renters shouldn’t have to face losing their homes through no fault of their own any longer. Rishi Sunak and Michael Gove must stick to their promise before more and more families get caught up in these devastating consequences.”



Email the story to a friend


  1. Targeting 3 week exchanges

    I’m always tempted to buy a second home, especially around university cities, but banning no-fault evictions would kill my wish to do that. Imagine portfolio BTL landlords who do this as a business. Rental property will dry up and rents will go through the roof.

    More governmetal madness.

    1. MrManyUnits

      Self admitted marching powder fool is living in a dream world, I can’t recall anything he’s done to improve anything.
      Still would love to know the full details of MM approaching him for the VIP fast track loan for dodgy PPE.

    2. Jazz1971

      As a tenant on the receiving end I suggest the the Associations who govern and regulate their market look internally and take a good hard look at themselves.
      When you are managed by the people below
      You will understand why the Govt is stepping.
      The people above along with countless other continue to abuse the laws and regulations like it doesn’t apply to them.
      It’s too late now.
      The Govt has to do something to stop people like individuals in

  2. Robert_May

    Please would Kevin Hollinrake point out to all his right honourable colleagues the neither section notice, fixed or periodic is an eviction.
    They are not no fault evictions, they are the notices at the end of an agreement to occupy a property for a fixed term or an extension of the fixed term.

    Instead of outlawing something that works perfectly as the law intends, why not concentrate on changing assured, long term tenancy legislation to make it more appealing for landlords and agents? If there’s a problem amending assured tenancy laws make a new form of tenancy agreement that everyone can agree to from the outset and understand each of their obligations.

    I have been banging on about an apolitical housing department, free of the whims and disadvantages of electoral party politics for over 10 years. If we had a department in government that could plan logically and strategically a cohesive system that’s favourable to all stakeholders; landlords, tenants, lenders and agents we would very rapidly be rid of all this naivety, nonsense, lobbying and shenanigans.

    1. Diogenes

      Good points. That said, there is only one section 21 notice these days…

      1. A W

        But there are other notices out there… such as section 8 and NTQ’s to end a tenancy (dependant on tenancy type & circumstances).

    2. HowAbout

      … annual rent rises, inflation plus

  3. frostieclaret87

    The mass exodus from BTL landlords will accelerate.

    If I hand a car back at the end of a lease is it an eviction?? Of course not, s21 is simply a notice saying the lease has ended now please give me my car back – I don’t need to give a reason I just don’t want you driving it anymore. Very simple.

    Unfortunately thick MPs have been suckered in by Shelter’s spin

    1. Jazz1971

      Boo hoo.
      Your governing bodies have run this sector like a piggy bank.
      You have brought this upon yourselves.
      If you had properly regulated yourselves then this might not of got to where it is

    2. Jazz1971

      No remorse
      Your governing bodies have run this sector like a piggy bank.
      You have brought this upon yourselves.
      If you had properly regulated yourselves then this might not of got to where it is

  4. PJMQ1

    This law will inevitably create a two tier house price structure.

    1) a sales price for a property with tenants in situ that can only be sold to buy to let investors and cash buyers

    2) buy to live purchasers

    I suspect that thre later will see more demand and therefore inevitably a far higher sales price

  5. CountryLass

    S21 is not a ‘no fault’ eviction, it is bringing a contract to an end. But it is also not served without a reason, sometimes that reason is nothing to do with the Tenant, sometimes it is. But maybe the reason is just that they don’t fit into one of the boxes on S8, the tenant has just caused so many little irritants that the Landlord has had enough!

    That being said, I’m not sure if getting rid of S21 is going to be the big issue several people think it is. Without the reforms and help for the Court system it certainly will be a bigger issue but I can’t think of many Landlords who would get rid of a good, paying tenant for no reason…

    1. Mickey

      Maybe not, but will it encourage new landlords into the sector knowing that it won’t be easy to regain possession of their property if they want to?

    2. A W

      The issue isn’t the removal of section 21’s, its what will replace it.

      The fact that nothing has been done to alleviate a landlords fears that they won’t be able to get their property back is what is driving landlords to leave the sector.

      1. CountryLass

        Section 8 is still in place, and the plan seems to be that this is what will be used, with a faster and more streamlined Court process. If, I repeat, IF there is a Court just for Housing as has been mentioned several times, this should not really be that much different in timescales in theory…

        So the Landlords will still be able to get their property back, as they should be able to. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want it to go, but as it looks like it is, we just need to manage expectations and not start telling landlords that the sky is falling…

        1. AcornsRNuts

          “So the Landlords will still be able to get their property back” – do you really believe that in your heart of hearts? S21 was supposed to be mandatory yet the courts find excuse after excuse to reject the claim.

          1. CountryLass

            Yes, I do believe that if everything has been done properly then there is no reason for a property not to be returned. I know of some people who did a tenancy by themselves without an agent and have had multitude of issues, but I have not some across one where the tenancy has been done properly where it hasn’t been given back. Have you? Honest query there by the way, as if you have I would like to know what grounds the Court gave, if for no other reason than to try and ensure we do not get caught in whatever loophole they found.

            1. AcornsRNuts

              I have only ever had to issue one S21 and the tenant left quickly because he did not want his guarantor to now he was taking drugs.

            2. A W

              IF they update the courts then great… but that’s unlikely to happen within any sort of reasonable time. The courts have been so chronically underfunded for such a significant amount of time, its a wonder they get anything done.

              The biggest issue here would be timescales. A landlord will always get their property back… but they’d prefer it in 4 months as opposed to 1 year plus. Should a tenant not be paying rent throughout, or indeed paying a severely reduced rate… then this would likely bankrupt a landlord before proceedings are over. Landlords are not the money pits that the government paints them out to be. They have their own expenses and liabilities that they need to meet and rent is a big part of that.

              A tenant can easily add 6 months on to timescales without trying, they could likely add a year with a little effort and a doctors note. All the while the landlord is suffering, whether it be financially, mentally or just the general anxiety caused by the on-going legal process. All whilst having to remain compliant themselves.

              1. CSM

                My point exactly. I wonder how many who are in the its ok you can get a section 8 served have tried to actually do so. I used a “proper” agent , I had a “proper” contract, 11 months to get a possession order, more time to serve it, and the tenant just laughed and said get the bailiffs, so I had to go back to court and then wait for bailiffs to be available to come to get him out. He did a flit the night before, I want to register a CCJ against him but to do so I need his new address…………. word is he has gone abroad, its not just the lost rent, its court fees, stress, hassle, a lovely big bill to redecorate as he tried to set fire to the kitchen and trashed the bathroom as he left………… Who is paying my bills…. Tenants are always painted as victims, some maybe but some are not. I am the victim here, where is my redress. Certainly not in as so called justice system that is not fit for purpose.

  6. BillyTheFish

    The fact that 20% of MPs are also landlords and that they have a say in this legislation is a great example of our broken polictical system.
    Should MPs be able to control the direction of an industry from which they will benefit financially?

    1. A W

      I think corruption and incompetence is a slightly more pressing issue.

      I.e. former MP’s (including a Chancellor) being hired as advisors to asset management companies (not suspect at all). Or spending 4 billion on PPE that isn’t fit for purpose (and making profit from it). Or how about MP’s choosing companies that aren’t fit for purposes whilst having a financial interest in them like G4S…. or the plethora of other choices…

      1. Jazz1971

        There is good and bad with with everything concerning this reform.
        The real problem is the industries total lack of self regulation.
        They have let the bad eggs run amock for so long now that something radical has to happen.
        I’m under the freehold management of Avon Estates/YandY Management and I can tell you that it’s hell.
        If you can’t regulate people like them then the industry deserves every strict control thrown at it.
        People like the above ruin people’s lives.
        It’s not at all nice and these people have no compassion and laugh in the face of current regulation.
        It’s a shame as most landlords are decent.
        Sorry but it’s been brought on by the industry itself.
        Leaseholds should be a thing of the past and not used as a tool of fraud and exploitation
        The sector seems to attract the worst kind.
        Spivs with no compassion just pure greed

        1. A W

          You realise we’re talking about the PRS here and not Building/Estate Management. They’re entirely different industries…

          1. Jazz1971

            I’m talking about the industries total lack of self regulation.
            If you can’t weed out the serious mis justice then the more laws brought in to protect tenants is ok with me.
            Landlords have been making hay for a very long time with little reproach for straying outside is morally right.

  7. KByfield04

    It was in the Queen’s speech in 2019- just get it done already or be quiet. It’s going so I’d probably prefer a framework instigated by Gove than a Labour-led removal. The RRB- everything changes but nothing really changes.

  8. CSM

    When is the government going to understand BTL landlords primary motivation is not to provide social housing by the back door for governments who have failed to provide adequate investment for years. BTL is a business model. I have an agreement for a fixed period of time, thereafter it continues by default until one side or the other decides to end it.
    It would seem my rights to end have been removed.
    My rights to determine what happens to my property/ investments have been eroded. Its fine when the agreement works but when you have a bad tenant, getting rid of them is far from easy. If I fail in my duties as a landlord, then the tenant has legal redress, in reality I do not, Over a year to get a possession order, a year of no rent, but my commitments remained the same. Unless the government seriously fix the courts, small landlords will leave the sector, pushing up rents as demand further outstrips supply. How is this in anyone’s interest?

  9. HowAbout

    I recently hired a car, I paid rent, security deposit & insurance. I had a choice to pay top-up towards my insurance premium and reduce my excess.

    If I returned the car as per the agreement undamaged and on time, I know I will be refunded my security deposit and I have no claim on my history.

    If I returned the car with some damage or late, I know deductions will be made from my security deposit and I won’t have a claim on my history. Partial refund of security deposit possibly.

    … you know, where we are going with this.

    If I crashed the car, and it was written off. I will be getting my security deposit back and there will be claim on my history. Insurance I bought as the user of the rented car will take care of my liability.

    … a working model exits, only if anyone is interested.

  10. Jazz1971

    Landlords have brought this upon themselves.
    Your Associations are totally to blame.
    If they had kept their house in order then some of the laws being talked about and implemented might never of happened.
    Your industry is rife with corruption
    I have total misfortune of being managed by Avon Estates/YandY Management.
    We are being used a cash cow.
    This is causing a rise in S21s.
    What have the governing bodies done re investigating the above.
    Nothing nil zero.
    If you can’t police people like Avon Estates YandY Management then I have no sympathy.
    Let’s get some proper governance not this total incompetence and downright fraud that is rife.
    Boo hoo for landlords
    U don’t get my sympathy

    1. HowAbout

      …seek regulation as much as you did like…just remember cost of doing business is always covered by customers.

      No profit no business i.e. …you can guess.

      One can’t eat their cake and still have it.

  11. HowAbout

    Bring it on, rules based order is only good for business.

    BTL isn’t an exception but stop this hypocrisy sooner the better. Treat BTL as a typical business, happy days for one and all.

    Let’s stop the drama about homelessness too, when there isn’t anything like carlessness, sofalessness, foodlessness!

    Even if I bought my food from Asda for last 20 years, I don’t pay – No food for me mate. I got to visit the food bank, right!

    How about – No rent, no house. Criminal charges for property damage caused by Tenants.

    Next time please ensure landlords are given same support as others businesses during pandemic, if that means I got to pay VAT until next time – I am up for it. Like all other businesses, I will charge it to my customers. Win-win.

    1. Jazz1971

      Let’s see hey.
      Seems like Association members don’t want the party to end.
      They are guilty of fraud and corruption by association .
      I’m all for protecting landlords.
      I’m all for the total abolishment of Leaseholds.
      You get your own house in order and weedle out the the people who abuse the system.

      1. HowAbout

        … if that was possible, there wouldn’t be a need for police, afterall we the citizens of the country would weedle out the people who abuse the system.

        1. Jazz1971

          You are so naive.
          You should qualify for a licence to be a landlord.
          U might be a good person
          Trust me there are a lot that are not.
          It’s not a police issue.

    2. Jazz1971

      Landlords have been raking in the profits.
      You won’t get any compassion from me.
      If landlords have been caught with their pants down re interest rates then you should of banked the cash in the good times.
      If you couldn’t see the the hoke in interest rates then you are an idiot.
      Ps it’s getting worse.

      1. HowAbout

        …sort of agree some BTL investors are idiots.

        Property 500k
        Base Rate 5.25%
        Annual interest 26,250

        Who is not paying market rate rent , come AST fixed period end ?

        I suppose if BTL investors weren’t idiots rents today would be a lot (A LOT) more!

        Were Tenants idiots for overpaying when interest rates were low?

        1. Jazz1971

          Tenants are living on a shoestring because a lot of landlords even with very low mortgages are taking advantage.
          It’s a free market so up to them.
          Section 21s are on the increase because a lot of these landlords are unscrupulous.
          So are the agents who advise them.
          It’s got to stop.
          Plus the standard of service does not merit the rents.
          I have no compassion for landlords who milk the market and offer nothing in return.
          That does not mean landlords should not be protected by bad tenants.
          As I said this has all come about by the severe abuse of the system by big freeholders like Avon Estates, slum landlords and just plain greedy landlords.
          I hope they bring licences for landlords.
          U abuse and u forfeit the right to rent

          1. HowAbout

            Amen plus those who don’t pay rent on time and/or damage property and/or cause nuisance to neighbours should forfeit PRS too (as only complaint players are left in the sector after your wish has been granted)

            Amen ?

            1. Jazz1971



You must be logged in to report this comment!

Leave a reply

If you want to create a user account so you can log in, click here

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.