x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button

TODAY'S OTHER NEWS

A careful reopening of the evictions process ‘needs to take place’

A number of buy-to-let landlords face financial hardship because of the coronavirus crisis, especially if the existing ban of tenant evictions is extended. 

Some landlords who already had possession cases for rent arrears going through the courts prior to the ban could find themselves trying to cover more than a year’s worth of rent if the courts are unable to resume existing cases from 25 June, and that is why the National Residential Landlords' Association (NRLA) is calling for a ‘careful re-opening of evictions needs’. 

The government has paused eviction proceedings until 25 June and has also temporarily extended notice periods for some tenancy types to three months. It is not yet clear what, if any, alternative measures will be put in place later this month. 

The NRLA says that due to the virus, more than half - 54% - of its members have experienced some combination of rent payment problems or unanticipated periods when properties are empty.

Although buy-to-let landlords are eligible for three-month mortgage holidays, the NRLA points out that while this is helping to sustain tenancies, it means a cost further down the line.

The NRLA wants to see existing support extended to help tenants cover their costs, including the elimination of the five week waiting time for Universal Credit.

Ben Beadle, chief executive at the NRLA, commented: “A number of our members are having issues that arose pre-Covid and not able to get possession of their property. With any sort of ban - we don't see that as being a long-term solution. 

“We think a careful re-opening of evictions needs to take place that prioritises pre-Covid debt, anti-social behaviour and prioritises domestic violence.” 

Poll: Do you agree that a careful re-opening of evictions needs to take place that prioritises pre-Covid 19 debt, anti-social behaviour and domestic violence?

PLACE YOUR VOTE BELOW

  • icon

    It's very simple, and there doesn’t need to be any evictions…pay the rent arrears of the miscreants and they can stay until they again abuse the contract they signed and agreed to.

    You can get the first £20,000,000 from Shelter as they’re mad-keen to stop evictions.

    icon

    Everyone should be mad-keen to stop evictions. It is a devastating event for people on the receiving end. A small minority are chancers taking the proverbial but most are good people who have hit a rough patch.

     
    icon

    Echis, I am one of the largest private property providers to benefit tenants. Almost all make a conscious decision not to pay rent. Every Christmas I watch them spend more than I do, more than is normal on their b*stard kids instead of keeping a roof over their heads. You know not of what you speak, but rather hope/assume (incorrectly) people are innocently desperate…a great, great many are simply scumbags.

     
    icon

    Echis, we only need take a look in their wheelie bins to see where the money is going

     
  • icon

    Good luck.

  • Neil Moores

    We only have a a few evictions to deal with as most of our tenants have been very co-operative. Some are in difficulty and we are helping them to get through it, with one or two accepting our offer to leave their tenancy early and move in with family as they did not want to build up a debt. In terms of the ones that will end up in court, in each case they just chose not to leave at the end of their tenancy and stopped paying the moment the eviction ban was announced. I asked them to clarify their situation in terms of furloughing, universal credit etc. 2 didn't respond and the other 2 said 'mind your own business, the law says we don't have to leave and you cant make us pay. One of them specifically quoted Shelter's material as the inspiration for his stand. Very much a shame that, as a rental company, we will decide on future policy based on the idiots who spoil things for everyone else.

    icon

    No where does the law say the tenant does not have to pay, it just says that at present we have to delay evictions

     
  • Paul Barrett

    There is much hyperbole about the eviction process.
    Shelter etc NEVER accept that the vast majority of tenants do NOT vacate at the expiry of S21 notice.

    It would be great if they DID!!!

    Nope most LL know that as soon as a tenant receives a S21 notice they will STOP paying rent and will wait to be evicted.

    Rather than leaving things until the tenant has vacated it will be possibly worthwhile the LL issuing a Money claim online once there have been 2 months of rent arrears which is 1 month and 1 day where rent paid in advance monthly.

    The LL has an impossible situation to attempt civil recovery.

    But at least while the tenant refuses to vacate following expiry of a S21 the Civil Recovery process will have been commenced.

    As it takes so long to evict tenants via the County Court and with the increasing prevalence of refusal by DJ to allow LL to escalate to HCEO then LL could easily escalate a CCJ to HCEO.
    With the rent defaulting tenants refusing to vacate HCEO should be able to locate bank and savings account to apply 3rd party charging orders or to attend the property facilitating access for HCEO with keys.
    Then the HCEO will be able to enforce further etc.
    All this can be done while the tenants refuse to vacate.

    It is perfectly possible to add to a CCJ further rent defaults etc.

    Few tenants would expect to receive a CCJ before being evicted.

    Of this might incentivise them to satisfy the CCJ as they will have 30 days to achieve this to avoid it being registered with the Registry Trust.

    I think it is worthwhile pointing out to new and existing tenants that if they default on 2 months rent then they will have a CCJ registered against them if they fail to pay those rent arrears.

    So suggest that tenants should have sufficient savings in place in case of sudden income loss.
    The last thing these tenants would want is to have a CCJ registered against them.

    It therefore would be sensible for feckless tenants to have financial resilience to be able to meet their monthly domestic financial commitments.

    It is clear from the many comments in MSM and on this site that many tenants are completely feckless regarding their AST contracts as something that are purely discretionary.

    No LL can afford to operate a business model where the consumer of the service considers they have every right to consume a service without paying for it!!


    icon

    Great Suggestion Paul.

     
icon

Please login to comment

Zero Deposit Zero Deposit Zero Deposit
sign up