Opposition parties in both the House of Commons and House of Lords called on the Government yesterday to abandon the restart of eviction proceedings.
Courts have been allowed to hear eviction proceedings again this week for the first time since March, with notice periods extended to six months in most cases and no action over Christmas and the winter.
Landlords must also provide the courts and judges with information on how tenants have been affected by the pandemic.
But former Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron yesterday used a parliamentary debate to urge the Government to introduce another six-month moratorium on proceedings as the UK enters a second wave of coronavirus infections.
He claimed that 55,000 tenants, according to activists at Generation Rent, were informed of evictions between March and August, before the six-month notice rule came in.
Farron said: “The ban on possession proceedings had given protection to renters that the roof over their heads couldn’t be taken away if they have suffered financially during the pandemic.
“That protection ended on Sunday and now 55,000 households are in immediate danger of losing their homes.”
He said another six month eviction moratorium should be introduced during which the Government should repeal section 21, amend section 8 eviction rules so judges can have discretion over how tenants have been impacted during the pandemic and create a package of financial support for renters.
Labour’s Shadow Housing Secretary Thangam Debbonaire said it was “scandalous” to lift the ban just as the country was entering a second wave of infections.
Housing Minister Christopher Pincher rejected Farron’s figures.
He said: “It is the courts themselves that wish to reopen.
“There have been 3,022 applications made to courts for evictions, that’s 89% down on same period last year.
“Landlords are acting responsibly and talking to tenants to avoid such action.”
He said the judiciary will prioritise the most serious cases and won’t look kindly on landlords behaving egregiously.
Over in the House of Lords, Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Grender and Labour’s Lord Ponsonby, last night put forward a motion to annul and regret the lifting of the evictions ban, claiming there was a loophole that unfairly targeted tenants served with Section 21 notices before the six-month notice period was introduced at the end of August.
Commenting on the proceedings, Timothy Douglas, policy and campaigns manager for ARLA Propertymark, said: “No-one wants to see anyone unfairly evicted from their homes, but where necessary access to a swift, efficient, and cost-effective justice system is a key component of a successful lettings industry.
“Calls to block evictions will do nothing to improve the situation for tenants and landlords dealing with rent arears built up because of the impact of coronavirus.
“Efforts must be focused on ensuring the UK Government introduce emergency financial help to tenants in England who have fallen into arrears due to the pandemic.
“This is the only way to support those who are struggling and sustain tenancies.”
Delusional
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Does Tiny Tim Farron not realise that the figure he quotes of 55,000 has already been ridiculed (a bit like him) by everyone with half a brain since it was extrapolated from a “large” sample of thirteen?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
We now have proof that the lunatics really are running the asylum.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
So failed Farron blindly accepts figures from actavist groups like Generation Rant. He probably also, without question, accepts the often crticised statistics put out by Shelter as well, who appear to take a small and often skewed sample and extrapolate the figures to give outrangous results. Still what can you expect nowadays from any politician, all of whom are masters of spin. When will those in Government realise that landlords customers are tenants, without whom they would have no business or return on investment. They generally only wish to evict tenants when they cause problems or persistently breach their side of the contract. It is expensive evicting a tenant and not something done on a willey nilley basis. This has been further complicated by the courts introducing “the great obstacle” race with many hurdles, traps and trip ups to catch people out. How on earth do they expect investment into a market that is clearly being made into another Mrs May “hostile environment” which is encouraging landlords to leave. Returns are low and risks are increasingly high, just one duff tenant and the Government can ruin you and your lifes hard work. Good landlords are the ones that always suffer whilst the criminal landlords (Government emotional strap line called “rogue landlords”) will be encouraged to use illegal and criminal means of eviction to avoid 6 months notice and proably another 4 month wait to evict bad tenants, which may encourage violence and threatening behaviour whilst the underfunded police are going to be too busy issuing covid fines. When will they wake up from their political sweet dreams and smell the coffee.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Hi Will2
Do you mind if I nick and possibly use your sentence about the great obstacle race?
Regarding this ridiculous idea about landlords knowing about their tenants experience of covid, I have written elsewhere:
Where is the legal and moral justification for legislating that one party in a dispute should have an in-depth knowledge of another’s affairs and circumstances?
The Government now expects landlords to have an in-depth knowledge of their tenants’ experience of Covid-19. Interestingly, knowledge of other illnesses such as terminal cancer is not required – and never has been. It is not clear if the landlord is to be punished with an adjournment if they are unable to obtain this knowledge; which is highly likely as it is completely against the interests of the other party to comply if it means they are more likely to get evicted.
The implication is also there that if a tenant has had any misfortune related to Covid-19 (something it would be unlikely for someone to NOT have) they may be given a stay of execution of a possession order, regardless of the level of their arrears. This introduces the idea that non-payment of the contracted rent is no longer a ground for possession. Given this, why would a tenant who already has a poor credit rating ever pay rent again, when they might be able to get at least 2 years rent-free accommodation? (see the case below)
The Government hasn’t legislated for the same rule to apply to landlords’ mortgage payments, where contractual arrangements will not be undermined by Government edict. Indeed, in the retail sector it has been pointed out that, ‘while landlords are constrained from collecting what is owed to them, there is nothing to stop banks becoming more aggressive.’ Click here
For both residential and commercial sectors the Government seems to be acting on the principle that if a tenant is experiencing difficulty of any kind, they no longer have to pay their bills, possibly indefinitely.
So now one party in a dispute (tenants) can have their ‘illnesses’ and other misfortunes (real or lied about) taken into consideration, whilst there is no consideration of the other party’s (landlords’) experience of covid-19.
I would add that the lack of any leverage to get ‘won’t pay’ tenants to pay is something not reserved for the PRS. Hull council has said they have a number of these ‘won’t pay’ tenants now – who also obviously realise they don’t have to pay because the council can do nothing about it.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Well said. Much noise is made about PRS landlords but nothing is heard about social landlords and whether their tenants are in arrears or not. Perhaps because, in the end, it is only taxpayers’ money and there is an endless supply of that.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I have a Sister who is a Housing Director for a large London borough, and she has big problems with offending tenants who use every possible excuse to avoid paying rent. She is a strong Labour supporter but also understands she is running a huge business with taxpayers’ money, and will evict them because there are so many who need social housing and will be grateful and responsible. Of course, then there is the elephant in the room… illegal migrants! Hotels are now full. They’ll be asking to use holiday lets next! So much for anyone thinking of a staycation any time in the years ahead.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Hi Rosbeck73,
You are welcome to nick whatever comment you want. The sooner politicians and some idiotic charties/pressure groups start to understand the real world the better. They will all start crying if landlords removed their property from the market wholesale! and it certainly would be less of a loss to a landlord than some bad tenants can cause, all backed by your own foolish (vote seeking) MP’s!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Permitting a political debate to be extrapolated from a poll of just 13 submissions as a fair representation of 4m rental homes is a disgrace. Permitting S21s to be called evictions is a farce. 6 months in to a crisis and our politicians only solution is a further ban on evictions. What about ASB, what about domestic violence cases, what about tenants that need to be evicted to be rehoused by the local council, what about the (probably very small number of) people using the crisis as an excuse not to pay rent by choice, what about the landlords facing the prospect of losing their property? That our government has been unable to establish a support system that is fair to both sides- supporting those genuinely impacted by covid whilst tackling the other issues at hand- after 6 months for something so crucial as housing shows their utter incompetence and disregard for tenants and landlords alike. This alongside their utterly disgraceful handling of Grenfell and the current cladding crisis yet again underlines the need to depoliticise housing taking it away from the political football game and in to the hands of experts who can deliver and be objective to all parties.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The number of people using the crisis as an excuse not to pay rent by choice is growing, simply because they realise they can’t be touched for a now indefinite period, and believe the State will act as their safety net for when they are finally evicted and need a roof over their heads. Wrong! They will find themselves on the streets with their credit rating in tatters (assuming it isn’t already!) with no ‘decent’ landlord prepared to offer them accommodation. This will inevitably lead to a rise in unscrupulous landlords with tenants willing to accept everything that goes with that, and so the Shelter/Generation Rent rantings against the PRS will continue, with honest, decent,considerate landlords bearing the brunt.
I have one such tenant who simply decided to stop paying his rent in April (he wasn’t reliable before that!); currently, £3000+ arrears. He is refusing to engage and uses every excuse to ‘justify’ his non-payment. Landlord’s mortgage ‘holiday’ and therefore he shouldn’t have to pay, mental health, covid… except he’s continued to work throughout. He’s received the SEIS and will get the next one, he’s had a tax rebate, and he’s probaby fraudulently claiming UC. Just before the 6 months arrears point, he paid a months’ rent! He knows exactly what he can do and will be spinning a yarn to whoever is giving him advice! On top of all that, he is making other tenants’ lives a misery with wild all-night parties and the smell of Cannabis permeating their apartments. One even had his wi-fi code ‘stolen’ by my tenant to allegedly download child porn. I say ‘allegedly’ but the Police turned up and it transpires he is ‘known to them’ for this. One tenant has been forced to leave through fear of intimidation by his drunken and druggy ‘guests’ entering the block at all hours and breaking all lockdown rules, and especially extreme concern for their young children. Complaints are mounting but our hands are tied. In desperation, I’ve even offered him a full rent arrears amnesty if he vacates voluntarily, but he says he’s been advised to remain in-situ until he’s evicted, and even then, will be unlikely to leave, and my property will probably be trashed.
After 18 years I will exit the PRS as soon as I can. I’ve had enough. Why should the Government expect me to pay for someone else to live for free in my property, and yet the Government won’t support me as a small company director, on the State pension, and dependent on rental income to cover my costs. Why won’t the Government implement the same loan scheme fo tenants in arrears that we see elsewhere in the UK? Why not in England? My tenant would claim it and not pay it to me in any case, but it would be a start.
I’ve just listened to Rishi Sunak, and while there will be yet more support for those in employment, I still didn’t hear anything to support small company directors. My business is likely to fail, and to be honest, the Freeholder will be welcome to fight it out with my lenders over who gets the properties. Yes, my credit rating will be shredded, but at this stage in my life, I am unlikely to have to depend on a good credit rating for future financing.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register