Why is retaliatory eviction not against UK Law?

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

    #16
    Originally posted by theartfullodger View Post

    Yes it is unfair..
    Agreed.

    sadly there are landlords who will evict tenants for complaining or raising, say, disrepair issues..
    How many?

    Less than half a percent of tenants were evicted last year.
    The vast majority for not paying their rent.

    How many were 'good' tenants evicted for no other reason than asking for reasonable repairs?
    A tiny fraction of half a percent is my guess.

    That is not to say that makes it all right, of course, but scrapping section 21 (as is the implication) would cause more harm than good.

    Comment


      #17
      ram - I am amazed that you wanted to continue to be a tenant of that landlord.

      Comment


        #18
        In a free market economy:

        Landlords must be free to choose their tenants
        Tenants must be free to choose a property (and, by extension, landlord)
        Companies must be free to choose their employees
        Workers must be free to choose a job (and, by extension, employer)
        And so on.

        There will occasionally be vindictive landlords, tenants, employers, employees and others in various categories. I would argue that this is an acceptable price to pay for a (fairly) free and (fairly) democratic society. Regulation has a place, but can only go so far.
        There is a fine line between irony and stupidity. If I say something absurd please assume that I am being facetious.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by PJackson View Post
          ram - I am amazed that you wanted to continue to be a tenant of that landlord.
          Lets just say the rooms were MASSIVE, I ran an online business from there ( no detrement to the landlord or tenants ) Oodles of parking round the back and a leaking garage.
          Rent was £ 200 per month less than the property next door, ( identical buildings ) so extra heating needed was not too much of a burden, but there comes a time when Landlord should not discregard needed repairs.

          Since I left ( thrown out ) 2 more have left. Landlord now charges £ 20 per month less than I was paying, so he is £ 60 per month worse off AND he has to fork out £ 26000, so it's all back fired on him, so I am happy. It's costing him money for breaking the law on providing a safe and healthy property.

          Also the previous post, scrapping Section 21 is not what people are asking for, but wanting to see if there is any retaliatory evictions taking place, - that's all.

          Regulation has a place, but can only go so far.
          Wrong, my landlord was in breach of the regulations, and threw me out because I had the balls to make him obey the regulations.
          Last edited by ram; 26-05-2014, 11:40 AM. Reason: Regulation has a place, ADDED

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by redfrisby View Post
            The good tenants who pay their rent, look after the property, and yet when they ask for repairs or find the LL has broken the Law - what then?
            I agree it seems harsh and very unfair.

            However, rightly or wrongly, the law as it stands allows 'no-fault' eviction of "... good tenants who pay their rent, look after the property" yet don't "ask for repairs or find the LL has broken the Law". Ultimately, is that any more or less fair then allowing so-called 'retaliatory' eviction?

            If you allowed one and not the other, how would you distinguish between a standard 'no-fault' eviction and a 'retaliatory' eviction? Answer - you couldn't. If there was such a law, what would happen is that a new tenant moving into a perfectly OK property would instantly demand new carpets and decoration throughout, a 10% reduction in rent, oh, and maybe a bathroom refurb. When the landlord declines, the tenant would then have created for himself instant legal protection against a standard S21 'no-fault' eviction. The tenant will probably continue to make general nuisance of himself, but keeping within the T&Cs of his contract, just to reinforce the issue.

            What I'm trying to say is that as long as the law allows for Section 21 repossessions, which is currently a cornerstone of the buy-to-let market in this country, there's no way in practice to prevent 'retaliatory' evictions.

            Comment


              #21
              Ram your story is all too familiar for a lot of people, as you say I am not saying S21 should be scrapped but surely there should be something in place to stop LLs who do NOT obey regulations and Law using this section in retaliation on tenants.

              MOST tenants just want their LLs to do repairs/protect deposits etc. Why should someone be evicted for asking for their rights?

              Respect to you Ram for having the balls

              Comment


                #22
                Also an excellent point Ericthelobster

                Comment


                  #23
                  So few tenants are evicted that it's not top of anyone's agenda.
                  It's much more common in places where rents rise very quickly, otherwise the loss of revenue makes it an unattractive option for most landlords.

                  Landlord review websites will partially level the playing field, but they tend to go a bit Trip Advisor with only the hacked off posting reviews.
                  A good landlord is invisible.
                  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).

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Many s21s are issued: most tenants simply leave by expiry date (even if invalid). When court papers are issued even more leave.. .. For those few that get to court & gain a PO most tenants then go. Very, very, few get to the bailiffs & eviction stage. Statistics are patchy.
                    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...

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Why is retaliatory eviction not a defence in UK/English Law when it seems to work in other countries?

                      California for example:
                      A tenant who can prove that the landlord's eviction action is based on a discriminatory motive has a defence to the unlawful detainer action. A tenant who is the victim of retaliatory discrimination also has a cause of action for damages under the Fair Employment and Housing Act.


                      So why if retaliatory eviction of any kind can be proved without any doubt to a Court of Law is this not an allowable defence?

                      Why could it not be like constructive dismissal in employment?

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Is there a point to this question, or is it rhetorical?

                        There are unlawful discriminations in the UK, btw.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                          Is there a point to this question, or is it rhetorical?
                          What's the term for asking a theoretical question and then arguing with the replies?

                          Proactive trolling?

                          By the way Redfrisby, is that really your picture?

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by theartfullodger View Post
                            Many s21s are issued: most tenants simply leave by expiry date (even if invalid). When court papers are issued even more leave.. .. For those few that get to court & gain a PO most tenants then go. Very, very, few get to the bailiffs & eviction stage. Statistics are patchy.
                            Here's a statistic from Shelter;

                            http://news.rla.org.uk/shelter-needs...nst-landlords/

                            The data, published jointly between Shelter and British Gas* suggest that over the last year, 200,000 tenants in the private rented sector have “faced eviction” because they asked their landlord to fix a problem in their home. However Shelter has ignored the inconvenient truths.

                            Based on Shelter’s data, which indicates that there are 9 million tenants in the private rented sector in England, 200,00 is only a little over 2 per cent of all tenants, meaning almost 98 per cent have not faced the problems Shelter and British Gas warn of. It should also be noted that these figures refer only to tenants facing evictions and not actual evictions.

                            Official figures published by the Ministry of Justice in February show that in 2013, the total for all tenants – in both public and private housing – having their homes repossessed by the courts amounted to 37,739 homes. This combined figure equates to only 0.5 per cent of all rented homes in England. Shelter admit to scaling up the figures from their research.

                            Shelter also fails to explain how many of the tenants were failing to pay their rent on time and how many of the “evictions” were as a result of tenancies coming to a close. In this instance, many landlords may have sought possession of their properties in order to embark on refurbishments. It is also noticeable that Shelter fails to indicate how many tenant evictions are as a result of anti-social behaviour.


                            So going from a Shelter fund raising advertising campaign (which most would agree is hardly impartial) the highest proportion of rent paying, non-ASB, 'good' tenants threatened with retaliatory eviction, is a tiny fraction of one percent.
                            Last edited by boletus; 26-05-2014, 16:14 PM. Reason: *Worth landlords remembering who they are in bed with when choosing a repair contractor.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              I am 34 years old and live in the West Midlands - I am NOT a troll. I am also not arguing with anyone!!

                              I thought I was having a discussion about the unfairness of using section 21 to evict in retaliation. I was ASKING for your opinions and putting my opinions forward.

                              JKO - is it relevant what my avatar picture is on this forum?

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Hi from the west midlands!

                                "Retaliatory discrimination" is a very different thing than retaliatory eviction and would be illegal in England as it is in itself disciminatory.

                                Landlords are not able to discriminate against tenants on the basis of race, gender, disability, sexuality or religion and evicting someone who made a complaint of discrimination would be a dumb idea.
                                Unless the complaint turned out to be invalid, then, oddly enough, it would be OK.

                                It just isn't a big deal generally - it must be bloody annoying if it happens to you, but - honestly - if your landlord is that much of a dickhead,
                                you're better off finding a better landlord to be a customer to.
                                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).

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X