Scrapping of Section 21

[Grampa]

Housing minister Esther McVey has confirmed the scrapping of Section 21 repossessions in favour of a new set of rules.

In a written answer to a question from Tory MP Steven Baker on the eve of the dissolution of Parliament in readiness for the General Election on December 12, she let slip a revamp of no fault evictions was definitely on the way.

Baker asked if she would meet social housing providers in his Wycombe constituency to discuss the impact of abolishing Section 21 evictions.

McVey wrote that her department was sifting through more than 20,000 responses to the Section 21 consultation that closed earlier this year.

“As part of this new deal [for landlords and tenants], the government has agreed to consult on repealing Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988. This would provide tenants with greater security in their homes because landlords would not be able to end a tenancy without a specified reason,” she told the MP.

“Our consultation, ‘A New Deal for Renting: Resetting the balance of rights and responsibilities between landlords and tenants’ sought views from across the private and social rented sectors on how the new system should operate, including whether the reforms proposed (including the use of Section 21 notices) should extend to all users of the Housing Act 1988, including social housing providers. As part of the consultation process my officials met with a number of housing associations, including some who operate in the Wycombe area, and discussed how a more effective system can be developed that works for everybody.

“We will publish our response in due course, setting out how the new system will work and our next steps.”

Under Parliamentary rules, McVey loses her seat as an MP when Parliament is dissolved, but continues in her job as housing minister until the election, as the roles are separate from each other.

Original Source: Guild of Residential Landlords

[Richlist]

Let's hope the ' new set of rules' is both an improvement and a benefit for landlords as well as tenants.

There is room for improvement in the s21 process as there is with all aspects of renting and letting. I have more confidence in the Conservatives coming up with a better system than the Labour Party.

[Grampa]

51 minutes ago, Richlist said:

 

There is room for improvement in the s21 process as there is with all aspects of renting and letting. I have more confidence in the Conservatives coming up with a better system than the Labour Party.

Amen to that.

[Melboy]

Interesting.  I am all for a new deal especially one that does not discriminate against landlords who are suffering from a tenant from hell.

There has to be a fast track eviction system in place for tenants who literally destroy their landlords property and refuse to pay their rent and honour a written contract and then after many months just leave the property with no penalty.

 

[Carryon Regardless]

The way I read the upcoming change is that a LL will need to apply to a Court to regain his property from an abusive T, or any T come to that.

The courts generally sympathise whith these T's in my experience so will strive to provide a further chance for them to learn and change, "treat this as a warning" type outcome. So I expect we will hear more stories of a LL being required to reapply, to the Court, for repossession if the T fails again. What is the cost of an application these days, £350ish ?

I can appreciate the initiative to improve reliability of accomodation and thereby the improvement to allow for people to build a life, but is it fair to make us effectively responsible and increase our costs when it comes time try and reduce our losses from the abusers?

As far as the state is concerned the abusers have to live somewhere, and these people being moved on will only increase the burden to the state. Any personal plight of ours isn't a concern as in the main we will bounce back.

We take a deposit that in reality can only compensate a small part of 'potential' losses. We sign up a G'tor who isn't likely to hand over large amounts easily, so we threaten their equity. Again the courts will sympathise, understandably.

The fair result is for the Gov't to underwrite. We are increasingly being caused, by legislation, to take over the role of social LL's, and the many risks of being any catagory of LL have increased drastically over the years.

But I'm dreaming as there is still a large supply of LL's willing to carry out the role even with the additional and ever increasing burdens. There is no reason the Gov't need to consider any protections for us.

 

[Richlist]

Let's be realistic.......whatever changes finally come into effect, they are extremely unlikely to be perfect.

Provided there are improvements that benefit the tenant.......and there certainly will be improvements for tenants in this, because that is the driver for making the changes to the legislation in the first place......then the  Gov' will be very happy.

Our job is to try to ensure that at the very least, the landlord is not disadvantaged more than he/she is already.

Until the proposals are published......and we will all have a chance to comment on them......it's not worth losing any sleep over what may or may not be.

I doubt that there is a lot of time or effort currently being expended by civil servants on the subject. Given the upcoming GE and the on going business of Brexit I suspect this is way down the list of priorities.

[Mortitia]

Governments have been tinkering with S21 since its inception in the Thatcher era. 

There is no guarantee they will get it right now in fact you can guarantee it won't be right as the civil servants take little or no notice of the advice and experiences given by the landlords.  Expect more of the same but with new learning curves for us to ponder along with judges who have to determine the first cases under new laws.

[Carryon Regardless]

For some it may be worth serious consideration.

Attempting to forecast the finer details may be difficult, but understanding the general result of this looks to be less so.

Prior to this coming in LL's that deal with higher risk T's may want to take preemptive action while we still have the S21, no reasons needed, tool to work with. Getting rid of those that we know to be high risk becomes intelligent before they are given increased powers to abuse us.

It's also intelligent to become more wary of the risks. With the S21 at our disposal we can, in theory, repossess in a couple of months, but realistically a bad situation becomes 6 months. Soon enough that may well become 12 months. We already experience varying court appearance wait times where S8's are defended, that won't get better.

[Grampa]

I guess the devil will be in the detail of the extra grounds and the speeding up of the eviction procedure they are proposing for the S8 process. 

As it is you can act (apply to the court for a hearing) for anti social behaviour  ground 14 immediately after serving the s8 and for rent arrears 14 days after  service. However for the mandatory rent arrears you have to already be 2 months owing and for g14 you would have to a had built up a decent dossier of anti social behaviour which can take months.  

You also have to attend or have an solicitor go to the hearing where with a s21 it is mostly not necessary.  

[kanrent]

Hope I will be able to evict my tenant if I decide to move into the property myself 

Or if I decide to sell the property