PDA

View Full Version : Eviction - but not the usual



Stevo
25-05-2005, 11:21 AM
Hello,

I have some tenants who are in the final month of a 6 month AST.

They told me that they were not going to stay on once the AST was finished and that they would be seeking council accomodation.

My tenants contacted me last week to say that in order to get a council house they need to be homeless (ie evicted by me), but they need to be in their council accomodation at the latest of 1st of august.

Now then..

The last day of the AST is 13/6, in order to evict them I have to issue a section 21 notice giving two months notice from the next payment period which means that the notice date will be after 13/8, this takes them beyond the 1st August deadline.

Is there a speedier way of evicting them bearing in mind they want to be evicted?

cheers

MrWoof
25-05-2005, 18:36 PM
Not if you are to stay legal. They want a council house but obviously don't know how to get one. Firstly, you need to serve a section 21 notice, the council will tell the tenant to stay until they get notice to quit from the court, then they will tell them to wait until the bailiffs arrive (guess who's paying for all this). then, in my area they go into a B&B. If they are deemed to be intentionally homeless, 28 days later they are on the street, otherwise, they stay there until accommodation becomes available.
The council will ask you why you are evicting the tenant, they will ask if the tenants have been a problem, if you say yes they ask whether you would have kept them on if there had been no problems. If you say yes to this then the tenant can be deemed to be intentionally homeless. If you say no, then why are you evicting them? Here, the council will check to see if you have another tenant in the property. If you decide to help the tenant then basically, you would be committing a fraud although it would be difficult to prove. Also, why should you? You will presumably want another tenant in quickly to minimise your losses.

zoe
25-05-2005, 19:12 PM
Mr Woof

you are talking ***** !! If the LL wants possesion he will need to serve notice, this is not helping them. If the council advises the tenant that they have to stay then the LL has to go to court ect.

Stevo - if you are in the fixed period you can serve notice now and it does not need to fall on the rent day.

Stevo
25-05-2005, 19:16 PM
This does not sound good.

They are quite good tenants, I have had some minor delays in receiving rent but the place is immaculate. They told me they were going to leave and I decided to put the place up for sale (need the cash to support a career change).

Can the council really tell the tenants to stay until evicted by baliffs?

MrWoof
25-05-2005, 19:53 PM
Stevo, I'm going through this right now and yes, that is just what the council are telling the tenants.


Mr Woof

you are talking ***** !! If the LL wants possesion he will need to serve notice, this is not helping them. If the council advises the tenant that they have to stay then the LL has to go to court ect.

Stevo - if you are in the fixed period you can serve notice now and it does not need to fall on the rent day.Zoe, I always read what you have to say carefully but this post, I don't understand. The tenant is in the last month of a 6 month tenancy, Stevo implied that he has not yet served notice so he has to go through the procedure to evict, you seem to be saying the same thing as me but in less detail. May I respectfully suggest that you read my post again. The only thing that has changed is that Stevo intends to sell, so the tenant will not be intentionally homeless and should get a council house but not by 1st August.

justaboutsane
25-05-2005, 20:00 PM
We had a tenant very similar to yours Steveo, they were very good, kept the place as tidy as they could (a rogue property manager put them into a house that needed work!) and they paid their rent on time, they decided they wanted a council place and we had to issue a section 21, when the council called and asked why we said that we were wanting to renovate and sell the property, which was almost the truth, we had consuidered renovating it and selling it. We were lucky we did not have to take it to court as the council rehoused them soon after. Now they are asking us if we can rehouse them! The council house they have needs work and it was already supposed to have had lots done! They are soo unhappy where they are they want to move back into one of our houses!

Every council is different, where they have available housing stock they will rehouse very quickly however in an area of hig demand the tenant will be told to wait it out until the baliffs evict.

Stevo
25-05-2005, 20:12 PM
If I have to go to court and appoint baliffs can I use the tenants' deposit to pay the fees?

(should really do a search for that one :) )

MrWoof
25-05-2005, 20:27 PM
I think that you can only use the deposit to cover damage and, if it is in the agreement, unpaid rent. Could be wrong on this though. I had to pay £150 for the court order (the court orders the tenant to pay this) and will have to pay a further £90 for the bailiffs.

zoe
26-05-2005, 11:04 AM
Mr Woof

it was this "If you decide to help the tenant then basically, you would be committing a fraud although it would be difficult to prove." that I was argueing about. I was pointing out that by evicting the tenants the LL was not helping them and it would not be fraud.

sorry about the tone, having a hard day with my 10 week old son and have just been made redundant !!

Zoe

PaulF
26-05-2005, 11:31 AM
Try using bullet points to help Stevo:-


You MUST serve a S.21 (1)(b) Notice before the end of the fixed term, to expire not less than two months hence (as Zoe states it doesn't have to be at the end of a rent period).
If you do this after 13 June, if/when it becomes periodic, then you will need to serve a S.21 (4)(a) Notice to expire at the end of a rent period at least two months before wanting possession, so it's best to serve the notice as in (1).
It doesn't matter what the council advises the tenant, you must carry out the correct procedure and follow it through, using the accelerated possession procedure if necessary after expiry of the notice you have served.


It amazes me that nobody has told Stevo the difference between the two types of notice and the significance if he were to get it wrong, and Mr Woof, Zoe is right about what you've said, it WAS confusing!

lucyitswd
26-05-2005, 12:01 PM
If i were you i wouldn't help them, my LL decided to serve notice followed by an accelerated possession order on me so they could sell their property but telling myself and the courts that they were homeless themselves, they were infact lying, the judge took a very dim view on this and threw the case out he also awarded them full costs of the hearing. If thats not a good reason on why not to tell fibs in court i don't know what is. Your compassion to help others could land you right in it.

Jennifer_M
26-05-2005, 12:13 PM
You don't need to state a reason to serve a s21 ! You serve it, they don't move out, you go to court.

zoe
26-05-2005, 12:54 PM
serving notice is not helping !!! It is getting your property back. The LL does not need to tekk anybody why he is doing it but just serve it.

Stevo
26-05-2005, 15:28 PM
Thanks for the heads up regarding the date requiring posession.

This means that (if I issue the notice today), the notice period will be up after 26/07/05 - with any luck I'll have a buyer and the tenants will have their council house.

I spoke to the housing people and they said that they should be able to house them within the two months notice and that not many cases go to court.

Andy Parker
26-05-2005, 19:10 PM
Zoe - Your response was intemperate and vulgar.It is ,of course, fraudulent to collude with a tenant for the purpose of obtaining a council property.

Stevo
26-05-2005, 19:22 PM
Just checked my section 21 notice and it does not mention the '(1) (b)' - should it?

MrWoof
26-05-2005, 19:47 PM
Stevo, try this link, it will give you all the information you need. http://www.lettings-landlords.co.uk/info/sec_21.html

lucyitswd
27-05-2005, 23:27 PM
sorry did not intend to offend you 'ladies' was merely pointing out the implications of lying in a court of law.