Campaigns Regulation and Enforcement

Government to launch consultation on scrapping Section 21

Property Image for a property management course
Victoria Barker
Written by Victoria Barker

The RLA is warning that there could be “serious dangers” to the supply of rental housing for vulnerable tenants as a result of government plans to axe Section 21.

The Government is proposing a consultation on the abolition of Section 21, so called  ‘no fault’, repossessions in the private rented sector in favour of improving the court system to ensure landlords can more speedily repossess properties through them in legitimate cases.

David Smith, Policy Director for the RLA said:

 “Whilst the RLA recognises the pressure being placed on Government for change, there are serious dangers of getting such reforms wrong.

“With the demand for private rented homes continuing to increase, we need the majority of good landlords to have confidence to invest in new homes. This means ensuring they can swiftly repossess properties for legitimate reasons such as rent arrears, tenant anti-social behaviour or wanting to sell them. This needs to happen before any moves are made to end Section 21.

“For all the talk of greater security for tenants, that will be nothing if the homes to rent are not there in the first place. We call on the government to act with caution.”

Government data shows that on average tenants live in their rental properties for over four years and that in 90 per cent of cases tenancies are ended by the tenant rather than the landlord.

The RLA is warning that at a time when the demand for rental homes is outstripping supply, especially among vulnerable tenants, the Government risks exacerbating the problem if it does not ensure that landlords have complete confidence that they can repossess properties swiftly for legitimate reasons. These include tenant rent arrears, tenants committing anti-social behaviour and landlords wanting to sell their properties.

With the Government’s own data showing that it takes over five months from a private landlord applying to the courts for a property to be repossessed to it actually happening, the RLA argues that it is vital that a reformed and improved court system is able to bed in and the grounds to repossess properties are properly improved before making changes to Section 21. This would follow the lead set in Scotland.

Research by Manchester Metropolitan University for the RLA has found that in a large majority of cases where tenants are asked to leave their properties under Section 21 notices there is a clear reason. Half of the notices are used where tenants have rent arrears, are committing anti-social behaviour or damage to the property. Other common reasons include the landlord needing to take back possession of a property for sale or refurbishment.  The report’s authors argue that this “raises questions” about whether the use of Section 21 notices can properly be described as ‘no fault’ evictions, as some have called them.

The RLA is currently consulting the landlord community to establish what measures would be needed to ensure they have confidence in the system before efforts are made to end Section 21 repossessions. Please take the survey here.

About the author

Victoria Barker

Victoria Barker

Victoria is the Communications Officer for the RLA.

She is responsible for producing articles for our Campaigns and News Centre, the weekly E-News newsletter and media review, and creating social media content. She also contributes to our members magazine, Residential Property Investor.

3 Comments

  • I have only ever used the Section 21 Notice to evict problem tenants who have left owing me in excess of £10,000. In each case I had to use the N5b form and bailiffs to recover the property and the process from start to finish took over 5 months! therefore I fail to understand the perception that you can evict a tenant in 8 weeks???

    In addition to this there is no practical way of recovering any of the court costs and rent arrears despite the court ordering the tenant to pay them. Nor is there any compensation for the stress caused to landlords and their families.

    Without the Section 21 the Section 8 needs to enable landlords to evict BAD TENANTS in a smooth and efficient manner, perhaps in the same way as the Scottish model. At the same time I understand that good tenants should be protected from bad and irresponsible landlords and therefore whatever legislation is agreed needs to be fair to both parties.

  • Totally agree that whatever changes are proposed, they should first pass the “fair to both” test. A fault is not the same as a reason, or lack thereof.
    Politicians, especially those without any experience of letting property, should stop making an issue of this aspect of renting simply to attract cheap votes. At the moment we have this silly political pantomime of “Boo-Hiss” whenever anyone mentions a landlord. Lets define the terms within rental agreements and introduce some respectful balance into the whole debate. The rental agreement needs tighter definitions to provide firmer guidance in case of future disputes.
    I think the rental agreement should acknowledge that the parties are expected to act respectfully towards one another’s situation and property. It shouldn’t be only about “rights”.
    I think the idea that a landlord would not be able to evict without proving that a tenant is at “fault” echoes the current marital divorce procedure that the government is currently trying to eliminate. It is similar for landlords and tenants, if it doesn’t work for one, it cant work for both.
    Thanks!

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.