ground 17

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    ground 17

    is ground for eviction 17 valid in the uk, can anyone tell me if they have used this, think it relates to tenant lying on application for contract, ie saying they were working when they were not
    Regards
    Martin Hill

    #2
    Yes, it's one of the grounds for eviction using the section 8 procedure under the Housing Act 1988. If the tenant has lied on the contract it looks prima facie applicable, but I am unaware of if there are any cases on its use.
    Disclaimer:

    The above represents my own opinion, derived from personal knowledge and should not be relied upon as definitive or accurate advice. It is offered free of charge and may contain errors or omissions or be an inaccurate opinion of the law. I accept no liability for any loss or damage suffered as a result of relying on the above.

    Comment


      #3
      It is only valid in England & Wales and is a 'discretionary' ground - the judge will make a decision whether the issue is serious enough to warrant making the tenant homeless.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by kipper View Post
        is ground for eviction 17 valid in the uk,
        Ground 17 is in Schedule 2 Housing Act 1988, entitled 'Grounds for Possession of Dwelling-houses let on Assured Tenancies'. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/schedule/2

        HA1988 only applies to assured [shorthold] tenancies in England/Wales.

        can anyone tell me if they have used this, think it relates to tenant lying on application for contract, ie saying they were working when they were not
        Yes, it would apply to a tenant lying on the application form for a tenancy.

        As you will see on the above link, Ground 17 says:

        The tenant is the person, or one of the persons, to whom the tenancy was granted and the landlord was induced to grant the tenancy by a false statement made knowingly or recklessly by—
        (a) the tenant, or
        (b) a person acting at the tenant’s instigation.

        It's a discretionary ground, meaning that the court is not obliged to make a possession order even if you prove your case.

        Comment

        Latest Activity

        Collapse

        Working...
        X