Evicting an Excluded Tenant

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Evicting an Excluded Tenant


    Wondering if we can go through with evicting an excluded tenant from a property (property under estate management / probate) , by giving notice to quit, locksmith, police, change locks etc) even though this tenant now has an active court claim submitted (may be dismissed before a hearing, due to it being a farce and no supporting evidence) OR should we wait until the hearing concludes on this matter?

    The claim is for equitable interest in the property.

    Didn't really want to get too caught up in the claim part but more the technicality of whether we could ask this person to still leave (as they pay no rent and won't allow the acting LL access to the property for inspection) and they could still pursue their claim from outside the property (as its cash they're after from the sale) .

    I guess I should explain a bit more before I get mullered.. The claim (which we feel is bonkers) is that because he paid rent for 6 years and some of his rent helped the LL pay the mortgage, that he has an equitable interest and that the WHOLE property is now his. (think buy to let on this, a LL buys a second property rents it out and uses that income to pay the mortgage then that tenant says, I paid your mortgage so it's mine, that's the claim).

    He is not the beneficiary, has no tenancy agreement no legal status (by this I mean he is not on the property deeds/title its in the deceased name) and their is still mortgage outstanding to be cleared.

    We essentially want the property vacant for sale reasons (to clear the mortgage ) or at the very least access to property to begin sale proceedings /estate agents access etc.

    This has gone on for over a year.

    We have legal counsel on the claim.
    I'm asking just about the status of IF we wanted to go ahead with 'evicting the excluded tenant' do you think we would have grounds to?

    The claim could take many more months ­čśĆ

    If the person has no right to be in the property, they can be removed.
    But it sounds like they have some right to be there - because they used to be a tenant?

    There's obviously a great deal of history missing which makes it impossible to comment really.
    The tenant's claim of beneficial ownership sounds daft, but if they paid rent for a period, why have they now stopped and how do they have possession?
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).


      He HAS paid rent in the past. You agree he has paid rent for several years. So he is a tenant, not an excluded occupier. Probably an AST tenant so s21, s8 etc.. deposit protection, GSC, EPC, "How to rent" etc....

      A tenancy does not have to be in writing - as long as there is evidence of occupation (you are confirming this..) & of paying rent (you are confirming this..) he's a tenant: Even if not paying rent: For many years

      He may be viewing this thread.

      Was this individual in any sort of relationship with the Landlord? Presumable the occupant and the "landlord" (? do you also mean owner, not necessarily the same thing) do NOT still (or ever..) live in the same building?

      Just because you have paid for a legal opinion does not mean it was correct. Was the legal opinion just on the question of the occupier having a beneficial interest in the property, or (or and/or) the question of his tenancy status?

      Is this the same human as in
      & if so, what notices (s21, NTQ, s8..) have been served by whom on the occupier?

      Are you owner, landlord, agent, solicitor, neighbour - what, pray?
      I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...


      Latest Activity