The new Review Hearings, introduced by the courts to help prioritise the most urgent eviction cases, are adding time and cost to landlords’ existing cases, according to Landlord Action.
The purpose of the Review Hearing, which is carried out over the phone, is to determine whether the landlord’s case should proceed to a substantive hearing at a later date. However, in order to determine this, landlords, or their solicitors, are required to provide a Review Bundle.
This, according to the tenant evictions specialist, comprises of the claims form, particulars of the claim, defence, rent statements for the last two years with a running total of arrears, daily rate of rent and interest, the tenancy agreement, statements setting out previous attempts to recover arrears and the effect of Covid on the landlord, any information on the effect of Covid on the tenants and an Order from court.
The Review Bundle must be filed at court via email and a copy issued to the tenants 14 days prior to the Review Hearing. If the bundle is not filed, cases can be struck out, which is obviously bad news for landlords desperate to regain possession of their property.
Paul Shamplina, founder of Landlord Action, said: “We understand that this stage has been introduced to alleviate the current backlog of cases and assist the courts in prioritising the most urgent cases. However, it is adding a further delay for landlords, which in turn means additional costs.
“The level of work required to prepare Review Bundles is substantial and as such, Landlord Action has had to set up a whole new team dedicated to dealing specifically with the extra work that the Review Hearings process has created. Whether a landlord’s case proceeds as priority to a Substantive Hearing will be determined by the evidence submitted prior to the hearing so there is no margin for error.
“We are doing everything we can to minimise this delay for landlords but it is unexpected additional work. We then have to replicate the work again for a Substantive Hearing, which is set for some time after the Review Hearing and requires attendance and representation.”
Comments (4)
What is the point of duplicating the claim documentation already submitted in a Section 21 Application for Accelerated Possession? All the documents have previously been supplied to the Court when the claim was originally filed and the Court usually serves copies on the Defendants when the claim is issued. The Court requires a statement regarding the effect of coronavirus on the Defendants when the Reactivation Notice is issued – there is nothing else to be produced – let a Judge review the paperwork by all means but surely to goodness, you shouldn’t have to produce it all again! The last application I made required 184 bits of paper for each bundle (with a bundle for the Court, each Defendant and the Claimant that made an eye watering 736 pages in all!) – any wonder the Court system is getting bogged down!
It is all designed to delay LL seeking eviction. I have carried out 5 evictions myself very successfully. Took ages. There is NO way I would even bother now. I would instruct Landlord Action I never got anything wrong before but it took ages. Now I would just handover to LL Action. The whole process is so boring I’d prefer to pay LL Action to suffer the boredom. Plus I know they would ensure all correct processes were carried out so as to prevent the County Court from rejecting the application which would cause further massive delays. The eviction process is a disgrace. Govt is doing everything it can to prevent LL from evicting.
There will be many LL who having eventually evicted will sell up.
There will be a veritable tsunami of LL selling up over the next 2 years as evictions proceed.
I despair of it. We’re adopting alternate methods now. Did a small claims online for a rent arrears tenant – cost us a bit but got the money within a week. Tenant stays in place, but isn’t building up massive arrears that they have no chance of recovering from.
The one that I’m waiting for a HCEO for, no rent for 14 months – that debt is being sold on once the tenant eventually leaves. Recovering 50% of it is better than nothing.
The eviction process is just not working. Issuing section 21’s now is just a licence not to pay. 60 days was a kick up the backside – 6 months is an exercise in ‘tomorrow never comes’ thinking
My understanding is also that certain cases which haven’t been de-activated need to be re-activated – no doubt another trap many landlords will fall into. The whole thing is a farce.