Surge in ‘no-fault evictions’ prompts calls to renew UK-wide ban

[Still Waters]

The number of renting households made homeless because of “no-fault” evictions has surged higher than pre-pandemic levels, sparking fresh calls for the government to ban the practice.

Close to 20,000 households in England were made homeless by landlords using section 21 notices in 2021/22, up from almost 9,000 the previous financial year, “alarming” new government figures reveal.

Housing activists complain no-fault notices are sometimes used to trigger “revenge evictions” if tenants complain about conditions or rent rises. This week the former head of the civil service, Sir Bob Kerslake, warned of a “catastrophic” homelessness crisis unless the government reintroduces the eviction ban that protected tenants during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Conservative government promised in 2019 to end the practice, but it has yet to pass legislation.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/sep/22/surge-in-no-fault-evictions-prompts-calls-to-renew-uk-wide-ban

Bring back eviction ban or face ‘catastrophic’ homelessness crisis, ministers told

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/sep/21/bring-back-eviction-ban-or-face-catastrophic-homelessness-crisis-ministers-told

[itsnotoutthere]

There is a flipside to this of course i.e. tenants that take the **** and don't pay the rent, sometimes for years.

[Setton]

52 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

There is a flipside to this of course i.e. tenants that take the **** and don't pay the rent, sometimes for years.

That wouldn't be a no fault eviction then.

[L.A.T.1961]

An eviction ban would remove the right of the property owner to make decisions about the property.

It would put buy to rent owners off buying property and reduce the availability of rental properties for those who prefer that option. 

This would cause a homelessness catastrophe.  

Another idea put forward without thinking through the full consequences, or unwilling to acknowledge consequences, as it does not fit with commentators ideology.

 

 

 

Edited September 23, 2022 by L.A.T.1961

[Setton]

23 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

An eviction ban would remove the right of the property owner to make decisions about the property.

It would put buy to rent owners off buying property and reduce the availability of rental properties for those who prefer that option. 

This would cause a homelessness catastrophe.  

Another idea put forward without thinking through the full consequences, or unwilling to acknowledge consequences, as it does not fit with commentators ideology.

 

 

 

Read the OP. This isn't a ban on evictions, it's a ban on no fault evictions. Basically stopping landlords who've signed a contract with their tenants just kicking them out so they can up the rent.

[L.A.T.1961]

2 minutes ago, Setton said:

Read the OP. This isn't a ban on evictions, it's a ban on no fault evictions. Basically stopping landlords who've signed a contract with their tenants just kicking them out so they can up the rent.

If you own rental property and decide you no longer want it or want to develop and add an extension, and would like the renters out, is that a no fault, unreasonable, eviction. 

I would imagine there could be two different views on this depending on being an owner or renter.

This could be more easily sorted with a forward looking legal agreement between both parties when the property is taken by a renter.

The contract could include the option of renters moving out within a reasonable fixed time after notification to leave.

Both parties know where they stand and if renters are unhappy with terms could look at other options.