• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • About
  • My Services
  • Training and Events
  • Landlord Law
Landlord Law Blog

The Landlord Law Blog

Interesting posts on residential landlord & tenant law and practice In England & Wales UK

  • Home
  • Posts
  • News
    & comment
  • Analysis
  • Cases
  • Tips &
    How to
  • Tenants
  • Clinic
    • Ask your question
    • Clinic replies
    • Blog Clinic Fast Track
  • Series
    • Renters Rights Bill
    • Election 2024
    • Audios
    • Urban Myths
    • New Welsh Laws
    • Local Authority Help for ‘Green improvements’ to property
    • The end of s21 – Protecting your position
    • End of Section 21
    • Should law and justice be free?
    • Grounds for Eviction
    • HMO Basics

Can this landlord make a claim against the court for a botched eviction?

This post is more than 11 years old

April 3, 2014 by Tessa Shepperson

Horrified manHere is a question to the blog clinic from Nick who is a landlord

I am a landlord follower of the blog and had a recent experience with an awful tenant, I wanted to check whether I could make a claim against the court for a recent botched eviction.

I served notice on a tenant several months ago, there was a variety of reasons why I wanted her out including rent arrears, antisocial behaviour, failure to allow a gas inspection and preventing access for emergency contractors.

It became clear that she wasn’t living at the property and was possibly subletting. Two notices for the above were issued and then retracting when she suddenly allowed access and paid her rent.

By this point I had had enough and decided to serve a Section 21.

The tenant made every attempt to sabotage the eviction, firstly by claiming she had not received the notice or been given a tenancy agreement and her deposit had not been registered. I was able to prove this was untrue and was given an order for possession.

The eviction was then delayed because the tenant claimed she was being harassed and produced a threatening hand written note which she alleged was written by ‘people working for the landlord’. She also said she had to go abroad due to a family bereavement and could not attend the hearing.

The court granted her special dispensation and she was given another hearing during which she made the same claims which were dismissed.

Eventually I was given an eviction date so I arranged a locksmith, took the day off work and travelled down. 20 minutes before the eviction I had a call from my solicitor saying that the tenant had registered another appeal, this time claiming she had suffered a miscarriage. After waiting around for 6 hours the eviction was cancelled.

The eviction finally went ahead 8 weeks after the original date by which time I had incurred further solicitor’s fees and paid a locksmith twice.

My question is this: if the eviction date had been fixed why was the tenant allowed a last-minute reprieve for a spurious claim? No one seems to have verified its legitimacy and a panicked decision was made which has cost me a lot of money and prevented me getting my property back on the market.

Also why was the tenant given special dispensation just because she went abroad, especially when she was given plenty of warning about the court hearing?

I feel the court is partly to blame for this fiasco, am I right?

You can write to the court and complain about the problems you have experienced but so far as I am aware you cannot claim compensation.

This is unfortunately the sort of thing that happens sometimes when you have a difficult tenant.  I had a similar case (when I did eviction work) of a tenant who made application after application to the court.

Needless to say the tenant attended none of the hearings and my lady incurred the expense (and the bother) of having to attend and arrange (and pay for) representation.

Eventually the Judge made an order that the defendant should not be allowed to make any further applications without leave – I think this was after this had happened about three times.

After that she was given pretty short shrift by the court on her (inevitable) subsequent applications, as it was clear that she was trying to play the system.

However the court will not do this unless the defendant is clearly not acting in good faith.  This takes a while.

The problem is that there ARE situations where it is entirely justifiable for a tenant to make applications and the court does not want to prejudice those applications by assuming that every time a defendant makes this sort of claim, that it is a ‘try on’.

There is also the problem that the courts are overworked, as are the Judges, and there is no time for the Judge to do an indepth analysis in the short time allowed to deal with things.  So to start with they often give defendants the benefit of the doubt.

However so far as evictions are concerned, the government are aware that there is a problem with the time it takes for landlords to recover property, particularly in situations where tenants are not paying rent.

I am therefore glad that you have given details of your case as it will serve as a real life example of the  serious delays that landlords can experience under the current system.

Previous Post
Next Post

Filed Under: Clinic

Notes:

Please check the date of the post - remember, if it is an old post, the law may have changed since it was written.

You should always get independent legal advice before taking any action.

Reader Interactions

Please read our terms of use and comments policy. Comments close after three months

Comments

  1. Industry Observer says

    April 3, 2014 at 5:11 pm

    So mandatory possession isn’t mandatory possession then?

    How can a tenant get a postponement or delay of any kind on a s21.

    Makes a strong case for going Accelerated

  2. Tessa Shepperson says

    April 3, 2014 at 5:16 pm

    Well a Judge can give a tenant up to six weeks after the date of the date the order was made, even under a mandatory ground, in cases of ‘exceptional hardship’. I suspect the tenants application fell within this 6 week period.

    The point about a mandatory ground is that Judges are not supposed to give any MORE than that, whereas for discretionary grounds they have a much greater discretion.

  3. Yvette Newbury says

    April 3, 2014 at 9:44 pm

    When faced with a tenant who plays the system in this way I would like to share with you something I did in this situation in case it may help.

    My tenant claimed he would be abroad on the court hearing date, and the date was postponed. I therefore telephoned him on his landline telephone number at the house at the exact time he should have been in court. He answered the phone and I had a witness hear him say hello and state his name. I asked my witness to sign an affidavit confirming what we had just done and faxed it to the court, and to my solicitor immediately. My solicitor later commented that the judge was NOT impressed that my tenant had lied and I am sure it went some way to speed up the whole process after that point! In my opinion, a judge does like to be messed around with and appreciates respectful communication. In this day and age of mobile phones it may not be as effective now but I wanted to share that in case it gave you an idea of what you might do.

Primary Sidebar

Sign up to the Landlord Law mailing list and get a free eBook
Sign up

Post updates

Never miss another post!
Sign up to our Post Updates or the monthly Round Up
Sign up

Worried about insurance?

Alan Boswell

Sign up to the Landlord Law mailing list

And get a free eBook

Sign up

Footer

Disclaimer

The purpose of this blog is to provide information, comment and discussion.

Please, when reading, always check the date of the post. Be careful about reading older posts as the law may have changed since they were written.

Note that although we may, from time to time, give helpful comments to readers’ questions, these can only be based on the information given by the reader in his or her comment, which may not contain all material facts.

Any comments or suggestions provided by Tessa or any guest bloggers should not, therefore be relied upon as a substitute for legal advice from a qualified lawyer regarding any actual legal issue or dispute.

Nothing on this website should be construed as legal advice or perceived as creating a lawyer-client relationship (apart from the Fast Track block clinic service – so far as the questioners only are concerned).

Please also note that any opinion expressed by a guest blogger is his or hers alone, and does not necessarily reflect the views of Tessa Shepperson, or the other writers on this blog.

Note that we do not accept any unsolicited guest blogs, so please do not ask. Neither do we accept advertising or paid links.

Cookies

You can find out more about our use of 'cookies' on this website here.

Other sites

Landlord Law
The Renters Guide
Lodger Landlord
Your Law Store

Legal

Landlord Law Blog is © 2006 – 2025 Tessa Shepperson

Note that Tessa is an introducer for Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers and will get a commission from sales made via links on this website.

Property Investor Bureau The Landlord Law Blog


Copyright © 2025 · Log in · Privacy | Contact | Comments Policy