Shelter has ratcheted up its campaign to have Section 21 notice evictions abolished, claiming that most recent government figures support its push to get the legislation – promised once again in the recent ‘levelling up’ White Paper – over the line.

The ONS data shows that 14,123 landlords began eviction proceedings between October and December last year, an increase of 43% on the previous quarter.

What Shelter doesn’t highlight is that the Covid evictions ban ended on May 31st and therefore, particularly as landlords in England are still required to wait several months between giving notice and starting proceedings, these delayed repossessions are only now beginning to move through the court system.

Shelter has also omitted several key points from the research – namely that when compared to the same quarter in 2019, landlord possession claims, orders, warrants and repossessions by county court bailiffs decreased by 43%, 67%, 67% and 64% respectively.

Below Covid levels

“The eviction ban has been lifted and, from 1 October 2021, all notice periods returned to their pre-pandemic lengths,” the ONS reports says.

“The number of repossessions and enforcement actions therefore continue to increase when compared to the same period last quarter, although they still remain below pre-Covid-19 levels.”

shelter

Nevertheless, Shelter says the ONS data points to a looming crisis. “Right now, huge numbers of eviction notices are dropping on doormats across the country, and our services are working round the clock to help as many people as possible keep the bailiffs at bay,” says its Director of Campaigns Osama Bhutta (pictured).

“The reality is though that thousands more people are at risk of eviction. Soaring inflation and rocketing energy bills may be the final straw for many renters struggling to keep a roof over their heads.”

paul shamplina portrait

Paul Shamplina, founder of Landlord Action, says: “The reality is the eviction ban ended after 14 months of suspension, a time when landlords could not evict so of course evictions will be higher.

“Landlords will be desperate to gain possession, after record amounts of rent arrears owing, throwing in the fact that landlords are using Section 21 to gain possession, to cash in on high house prices, they will sell their properties and exit the market.

“2022 will see a huge rise in evictions, especially when Social Housing providers start using the courts again.”

29 COMMENTS

  1. When will Shelter realise that the reason most tenants get evicted is that they don’t pay their rent? Abolishing S21 will not change those evictions. In fact, Shelter’s anti LL stance & lobbying of Govt for ever more pro-tenant legislation is helping to push LLs out of the PRS which will make it even harder for tenants to find a home in the first place.

    • I absolutely agree. I’ve used s21 to evict in instances where I could have used s8 which would have been worse for the tenants.

    • Absolutely correct. I’ve had enough of it and I’m selling whenever a property becomes empty. It seems like some think there is a divine right to free housing at the expense of people who pay mortgages.

    • Absolutely correct. I’m in the process of selling half of my portfolio too. Shelter only care about grabbing headlines so that they continue to justify their existence & to continue to get funding to pay their salaries. Disgusting.

  2. “Chinese Water Torture”

    Drip, drip, drip until it starts to erode your mind.

    About time Landlords and the NRLA started.

    It’s no good simply complaining about what Shelter say, the PRS Industry needs to be far more aggressive in getting it’s messages across.

  3. How about LZ starts the ball rolling.

    Instead of headlines “CLAIM: Shelter says….”

    How about “WRONG: Yet again Shelter….”

    • Because evictions have surged. So Shelter are not ‘WRONG’?

      It would be ‘WRONG’ to say evictions have NOT surged (because they have).

      CLAIM indicates doubt/ not full story (which the article then elaborates on). CLAIM is fine.

      • Nobody wants to own an empty property, one tenant gets evicted so another tenant gets a home. The problem is not evections, the problem is an inadequate supply of affordable housing, when will Shelter and the Government realise that and take some appropriate action.

  4. How many LL would be content with S21 being used just for rent defaulting?
    So that’s 100% of LL then!

    S8 can be used for all other reasons.

    A revised S21 to be used ONLY for rent defaulting which would allow rent defaulting tenants to be removed by a LL after 45 days of rent default with NO court action required.

    This to include 2 missed monthly payments of full contractual rent(partial rent payment not acceptable); and 14 days NTQ.

    S21 would always be fault based.

    There needs to be an extremely fast method of getting rid of feckless rent defaulting tenants very quickly without any court action being required.

    If on the 45th day a tenant paid off all rent arrears with CLEARED FUNDS then it would be illegal for a LL to remove a tenant.

    That means a tenant would have til 2400hrs on the 14th day NTQ to provide cleared rent payments to cover all defaulted rent.

    A revised S21 for rent defaulting is required now.

  5. Why does the NRLA not call out Shelter ? Omitting to mention certain things in a report whilst focusing on those that support your bias is wrong and tantamount to lying.

    If section 21 is abolished everytime a tenant vacates a property it will be very likely that property will then be sold. I know the proposed legislation contains a clause that tenants can be asked to move if the landlord wishes to sell the house but in reality why risk the potential argument and months of dispute when you could just sell up and invest elsewhere?

    I have never heard Shelter questioned as to where they anticipate all the tenants displaced by fewer properties will live in their utopian future . Why not ?

    Shelter and the various similar organisations never seem to envisage that property investors can and will just exit the sector. We have no obligation to provide cheap housing, and the government doesn’t own enough and nor does Shelter to provide for all these people.

    We are literally heading to a situation where tenants won’t be able to rent perfectly acceptable houses , let’s see Shelter arguing that landlords shouldn’t be able to exit the sector.

    • There will still be the same number of homes just with different occupants, the number of homeless will be unaffected by us selling up.

  6. Blah, blah, blah yet again.

    I have just given a section 21 to a tenant due to anti social behaviour giving her longer to vacate. I could have quite easily have given her a section 8 and she would have had issues gaining another tenancy. So who wins?

  7. S.8 should be made more efficient and procedure should be fast. S.21 is good tool but could be extremely costly if tenant puts up the defence. I see no reason in evicting paying tenants so s.8, if strengthened, should be great eviction tool.
    In any case it is not working great for Landlords who need to spend thousands in evicting tenant, especially those on legal aid. The reform is definitely needed and s.21 is not the biggest problem here. Court delay and months of unpaid rent during s.21 procedure is bigger issue. Out with s.21, possibly yes, but express eviction procedure, if rent is not paid more than a month, should apply instead. That would work better.
    I rent one property and I am interested in rent, not eviction. S.21 does not interest me whatsoever, but s.8 to get rid of Tenant who does not pay rent, very much does.

  8. Landlord Action comments but do they have stats they can provide? Likely they are one of the few sources of aggregated data regarding evictions, and I suspect they would be very well placed to say how many of the S21 cases they deal with are truly ‘no fault’ – I’m betting the vast majority are rent arrears, trashed property, anti-social behaviour and the like.

  9. Banning S21 will be the biggest mistake Shelter & the Government WILL make. It WILL lead to more homelessness. It may well even lead to an increase in criminality by desperate and already criminal landlords using less than nice tactics against the worst tenants. The housing crisis WILL get worse, the poorest tenants WILL suffer the most. Already landlords are toughening up on who they will let to; wait ’til you can’t get scummy tenants out and it WILL get one hell of a lot tougher for those who want to rent, or have to rent. Demand will effectively increase as supply falls and only the best prospective tenants will be able to rent. Shelter will have to change its approach and start buying and renting property rather than be political activists if this so called housing charity wish to continue. Of course they are experts in manipulation and will make it all sound like the landlords are the problem. Never mind the conservatives will probably just hold a bring your own booze party to celebrate their own stupidity.

  10. I have paid my rent every month without fail for the past 6 years.

    My landlord has to sell due to the pandemic and having to close his business. I totally understand and sympathise with my landlord but due to the high rents I am unable to rent anywhere so am having to be evicted and go into temporary accommodation god knows where.

    Maybe if the Government opened their eyes and see how much property prices and rentals have increased they would see it’s impossible to privately rent when you are on a low income.

    Local Housing Allowance rates need to be increased immediately to help people/families to be able to privately rent and thus stop so many being made homeless.

    • You are typical of the feckless rent defaulting tenant class.

      You do NOT need to be evicted.
      You could simply COMPLY with the NTQ.
      But because you are FECKLESS you WON’T comply with the contractual NTQ.
      It is because of scum like you that LL are selling up.

      It is IRRELEVANT that you are unable to source a tenancy where you would like for a price you can afford or CHOOSE to afford.

      MOVE to somewhere that you can afford or CHOOSE to afford.

      You are gaming the system because as we ALL know COMPLYING with a NTQ will be perceived by the Council as you making yourself intentionally homeless.

      So you consider that you have the right to game the system and force the LL to evict you.

      Will you be paying the rent and ALL costs the LL incurs til evicted……………………….Nope thought not.

      You are just typical of the welfare scrounging classes that LL increasingly want nothing to do with.

      Of course you are essentially a victim of bonkers Govt policies towards the PRS.
      But that is NO excuse for you to game the system and put the LL through financial agony.

      What you SHOULD do is COMPLY with the NTQ.

      I’m sure the LL will give you an excellent reference as it is not you that is causing him to sell up.
      You will then be in an excellent position to procure a new tenancy.

      You will however need to adjust your horizons on the basis that you may NOT be able to afford a tenancy where you most desire.

      I’m afraid for you that is just TOUGH!!

      It will be far better for you to comply with the NTQ as with a good reference another LL is likely to take you on.

      It is at your peril if you do NOT comply with the NTQ.
      The days of feckless rent defaulting tenants gaming the system are coming to an end!!

      • Maybe you can’t read but the poster said they have paid rent for the past 6 years unfailingly.

        On what basis are you calling them ‘rent defaulting’ ‘welfare scrounging’ etc. in your rant?

        LL ‘financial agony’ lmao. So agonising to get paid rent for 6 years (and then some – as this person has not stated an intention to start dodging their obligations – to which they have held for the last 6 years).

        • So what if the tenant has paid rent for the past 6 years.

          Any tenant who refuses to comply with contractual obligations immediately becomes feckless.

          The 6 years the tenant complied with contractual obligations.
          That in NO way excuses his feckless behaviour.

          The feckless waster SHOULD comply with the contractual NTQ.

          No excuses.

          Of course if the tenant continues to pay rent and all the eviction costs then fair enough.

          That would mean the tenant wasn’t considered as intentionally homeless.

          But very few tenants would be prepared to pay rent and eviction costs.

          Once S21 is abolished feckless tenants will find they have a CCJ for rent defaulting and eviction costs.
          Few LL would wish to take on such tenants.

          Such feckless tenants will have to consider whether gaming the system resulting in a CCJ is worth it!!

          • Whilst this tenant hasn’t stated they WOULDN’T be paying the rent and repossession costs it is highly unlikely they would be.

            Plus hardly a rant just a very simple description of the way that most tenants behave once given NTQ.

            Once S21 is abolished S8 will cause CCJ for every repossession.
            Not something any feckless rent defaulting will want.

            Potentially tenants might decide to vacate before any rent defaulting occurs to avoid CCJ.

            We shall see!!

      • What an angry little small penis you are, lol.

        You know absolutely nothing about me or my situation yet you call me scum. What a sad individual you are.

        I have a very good relationship with my landlord and will continue to pay my rent till the last day I am here. He still has a mortgage to pay.

        You find me a house that I can afford and yes I do work, pay national insurance, tax, childcare and have young children and I’d gladly be out before the NTQ date.

        You need to see a doctor and get some therapy for your anger issues and your small penis.

        What an absolute load of nasty shit you have come out with.

        I wish you all the worst possible tenants you could ever have.

        Loser, lol.

        • Bumblebee, you sound like the kind of tenant I would be happy to consider taking on if I had a vacancy in your area. If what you say is correct, you have received some very unfair criticism, but you probably have more moral support from us landlords than you think. Unfortunately the rents have increased owing to the government decisions on section 24 tax laws and the ever increasing costs of compliance imposed by politicians who fail to understand the unintended consequences of their decisions. The cost of repairs and maintenance has also gone through the roof in the last year or so. Therefore landlords who rely on their rental income have no choice but to raise the rents. I really hope you manage to find suitable alternative accommodation. Good luck!

      • paul barrett sounds like he’s mentally ill with narcissism or sociopathy. his pathetic ego even telling a long term renter who did nothing wrong to do this and do that and comply with this and comply with that. what a bossy controlling saddo.
        seems a common trend for landlords to act in that way.

  11. I wonder whether Shelter are aware that with S21 abolishment that every feckless rent defaulting tenant will as a consequence of LL being forced to use the S8 process be receiving a CCJ etc!?

    Such a CCJ will confirm a rent defaulting tenant.

    Can’t see many LL wishing to take on a tenant with a proven history of rent defaulting.

    Such a CCJ stays on credit files for minimum of 6 years.

    It is also possible for LL to extend that 6 year CCJ for another 6 years.

    I wonder how many tenants are aware that rent defaulting will now give them a CCJ!?

    It could well be that once tenants realise the damage a CCJ for rent defaulting could cause that tenants might start complying with NTQ.

    This as it will save them a CCJ if the LL has to use the S8 process.

    Of course Councils will now have a bit of a dilemma.
    They WON’T take on anyone who makes themselves voluntarily homeless; i.e. by complying with a NTQ from a LL rather than waiting to be evicted by bailiffs.

    If the tenants follow Council advice they will be eventually evicted………………with a consequent CCJ for rent defaulting.

    If the Council becomes aware of a CCJ for rent defaulting the Council WON’T house as they will say the tenant has been made homeless by refusal to pay rent.

    Tenants really are in a Catch 22 position.

    They will have Shelter; Generation Rent etc to thank for that.

    It could well be that feckless rent defaulting tenants comply with NTQ as rarely will LL pursue tenants for a small amount of arrears if the tenant complies with the NTQ.

    Tenants will realise that having a plausible non-rent defaulting history is very valuable requirement for qualification for all sorts of different accommodation circumstances.

    I believe that once feckless rent defaulting tenants appreciate the massive financial detrimental damage they can do for their future renting prospects they will comply with contractual obligations.

    Effectively gaming the system will no longer be to their advantage; indeed it will exactly the opposite!!

    Wonder if Shelter will be advising tenants to comply with contractual obligations!!!??

  12. I have used Section 21, when a tenant has wrecked the property. In some cases, deliberately, as they want to become homeless, so they can jump the housing queue. Where is the justice?. If there are changes to S21, then it would be made easier to evict problem tenants who wreck property and also me made easier for a landlord to search for such cases.

    I have a couple of tenants be rude to me, because they think this behavior is “okay”. They renting my property, not a right to be abusive to me. In such case, it is important to remain calm and professional. Such tenants will ignore Section 21. There should be new grounds, because a landlord (their agent and tradesmen) have a right to carry out duty without facing abuse.

    Shelter have done nothing for the rental sector, other then more laws, yet they keep complaining and complaining.

    My local council has introduced landlord licensing. A lot of my time, is being wasted preparing bundles of documents to send to the Council.

    It is become boring and mundane.

    It is the same with police who are drowned with paperwork, then going out on the streets.

  13. The best type of s.21 is the one where the tenant inquires and learns their property is an unlicensed HMO.

    s.21 is then invalid
    AND the tenant can make a Rent Repayment Order for their landlord’s (criminal) offence.

    • Well if course if a LL fails to comply with relevant regulations then that is their fault.

      As you suggest such failure to manage their rental property appropriately could result in a RRO.

      LL will need to ensure they are fully compliant and NOT rely on LA to do the job properly.

      If LA don’t carry out their contractual obligations then the proverbial buck stops with the LL!

  14. There are very few no fault evictions but section 21 is easier than section 8 hence it’s use . If and when section 21 is abolished the market will see the real picture and let’s be honest this will impact badly on tenants. Their dirty washing will be aired for any potential future landlord to see and this will then make their chance of securing another tenancy incredibly difficult.

    Fewer properties to rent higher rents and very few landlords willing to give problematic tenants a chance.

    • Yep those feckless rent defaulting tenants currently causing over £9 billion of defaulted rent every year might change their behaviour once they start realising that courtesy of S8 they will be receiving CCJ for their feckless rent defaulting behaviour!!

      Gonna be very interesting to see how feckless tenants behave to S21 abolition.

      How many will want a CCJ for defaulted rent!!!!!!!!???

      Might be easier to just vacate with no detriment to their status etc.

      We shall see!

Leave a Reply to ANon Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here