With demand continuing to heavily outweigh demand for rented accommodation, including social housing, Brent Council, unable to offer any practical alternative housing, has paid the legal fees of a private landlord who was pursuing a Section 21 eviction notice.
The agreement involves the landlord continuing to provide the accommodation, with the council taking over responsibility for the payment of the rent.
The case has come to light because of the involvement of a north west London Letting agent, which handled the start of the process on behalf of their landlord client.
The application for a Section 21 notice was subsequently handled by property-rental sector specialists LegalforLandlords.
Back in February of this year, LegalforLandlords, acting on behalf of a landlord client, made an application to Willesden County Court for possession of a property, which was granted in April.
But in June, the agent acting on behalf of their client was informed that providing the landlord was willing to halt proceedings, the council would pay the landlord’s legal costs, cover the rent arrears and pay the rent going forwards.
In this case the Landlord agreed.
With many smaller-scale landlords, fearing the changes in the Renters Reform Bill, now leaving the sector, this action by Brent Council might make them pause for thought. Is this a rare, isolated case of a council unable to prevent a homelessness case any other way? Or is it something that’s more widespread, a practical solution that could work for both private landlords and tenants alike?
Sim Sekhon, LegalforLandlords MD, was surprised by the council’s actions, but also intrigued.
He said: “It’s worth remembering that the private landlord in this situation agreed to the deal, but it could be that he or she had no real alternative? They were already out of pocket and facing a wait of many months for a bailiff. Suddenly there’s an offer made that seems to bring immediate relief and recompense. Is that a real choice?”
This happens a lot, I’m surprised the legal firm is surprised.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Everything aside, the landlord is still left with an untrustworthy tenant who defaulted on rent, what other issues will arise?
Woudl the council pay market rent if the landlord needs to increase?
Now this has hit the press, how many more councils will consider doing the same using our (council tax payers) money to subsidise their failure to invest in social housing over many years?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Well said, Jeremy. It is not Brent Council who are paying, but their council tax payers. What would worry me is that this tenancy extension will last until the RFB is passed and then the landlord is stuck with a tenant they do not want.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
We have been doing this with certain councils for nearly 2 years. They take on full liability for 12 months, repairs etc while they try and re-house. If not rehoused, back to court (but you were going there anyway).
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I personally do not consider any proposals from Councils are they are not trustworthy, responsible or appropriate. They tell tenants to stay put even once there is a court order, contrary to Government Guidelines. They insist that tenants are considered to make themselves homeless if they leave before bailfiffs call whilst at the same time are advising tenents to ignore the inital court order effectively insiting the tenant to become in comptempt of court. Are these people you should be trusting? I regard most councils as rogue oragnisations not worthy of trust or professional is their dealings. But there again perhaps I see things differently. With the timing in this case the current Renters Reform Act coming in I hope this landlord is fully advised of his decision. I would assume as the landlord is advised by an organisation that is well informed the landlord will be making his decision in full knowedge of the potential impact.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I thought that if a tenant stops paying rent they are voluntarily homeless and thus the council has no duty to rehouse them. If tenants know that this case can happen what incentive do they have to continue paying rent as they will be able to stay where they are (in a nice place rather than a cramped and dingy hotel room or such like.)
Also if the landlord needs to take possession of the property as they have to sell or move into it this would not be a viable solution for them, though I guess they would take it for a year just to get the arears paid and then proceed with the sale after that if they can wait that long.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register