Webinar on Evicting Tenants
We advertised a webinar being hosted by the Sheriffs Office about evicting problem tenants last month and this is the review we received from a member:
"Other people from the PDPLA may have attended the webinar on eviction. I have not got much out of it as I was unable to turn back to any slides either then or now. I would not be able to carry out an eviction procedure using the advice given though I might take the advice and use the sheriff officers to review the case, do all the work in court and what have you.. I think the speaker whizzed past critical details as part of a sales pitch and why not? The webinar was scheduled to be 1 hour but went on longer without me. It had a delightfully homespun approach to technology.
The talk was extolling the benefit of using high court enforcement officers (HCEOs) instead of attending court yourself/sending a lawyer and getting bailiffs. There are 63 sheriffs officers if I heard correctly, who have collected in £63 million. This would seem a perfectly legal alternative which they claim is very effective. HCEOs were set up following Courts Act 2003.
The speakers claim a higher rate of success roughly double and achieve it more quickly (weeks not months). Cost, basic fees are about £800 plus extras for serving various documents. In London that might save 2 months rent at £1500 per month for an average flat. Some court fees can be up to £350 per document. He gave the impression of treating eviction as something which had to be done very carefully, no excuse must be given to anyone to sue for damages following illegal eviction, must be humane and reasonable, household items must not be got rid of without legal advice etc. Must fit in with LA. homeless section. .
The most important items were
1) Any flaw in issuing the tenancy agreement appropriate to the date of the tenancy will prevent success. So with a tenancy issued after 1 Oct 2015 must have tenancy which says documents will be served by post, must have EPC, must show deposits if taken then registered, property must be licensed if necessary, no repairs are to be outstanding especially no repair instructions from the Local Authority, must if relevant have gas certs, electrical safety certs, tenant must have read agreement and had copy of How to rent'. Older tenancies need less preliminary stuff. He referred to law as defined in S196 of the Law of Property Act 1926 which defines this.
2)You must have 'leave' issued by the court to use a sheriffs officer. This is a critical stage. Very easy to get wrong and waste all document and court fees. You basically need the court's permission to use HCEO. a/c S42 of the County Courts Act 1984 fill in form N293A. which take it up to relevant court (Google underlined item for full explanation). See HMCTS website for details.(he said, I haven't). This leave to move the case goes in with the original claim form. Once leave is granted judge backs out. Before arriving to evict give notice to tenant (Rather random piece of advice)..
3) There is a rapid process where you won't get your cash back and a slower one where you will
4) They seem to go back again later to attempt to catch hold of the unpaid rent. All left a bit vague.
5) 35 years in business and best way of getting back rent out of people who can afford to pay is by clamping car. If they have nothing advice is given not to pursue or take useless items which you won't get anything for in an auction.(I mention this on as an example of home spun wisdom).
6) Mentioned the instruction now given to homeless sections of LA that LA need not wait before acting and can act as soon as initial notice 8 and/or 21 is received by tenant.
7) The following forms are all relevant, but whizzed through
- N244
- PF92
- PF88 or PF89 ie possession alone or possession and money
- Form number 16
8) Get it wrong and you might get sued or damages resulting from an illegal eviction.
In conclusion I wouldn't be able to carry out the process myself, I consider it would be worth trying them out to see what the costs really are as they sound as steep or worse than using a lawyer but it may be more efficient. "
If you attended and have other views or if you missed it but found this summary informative, do please let us know at