Less than a year after the last big increase in court fees – a further increase is being considered by Government.
The fees for possession claims are currently £280 or £250 when using the Possession Claims Online service.
It is proposed to increase these fees again by £75 to £355 and £325 for PCOL claims.
Initially the impact of this increase will be on landlords (who will not be happy about it).
However as, inevitably, a costs order is made in a successful claim, ultimately the people who will be expected to pay for this increase are tenants – many of whom are being evicted because they cannot afford to pay their rent.
Granted, a substantial number of tenants do not actually pay the costs (and many landlords do not expect them to), however this does not alter the fact that they will be ordered to do so by the court.
If you bear in mind also that many tenants are forced to remain in a property until they are evicted by their landlord – as otherwise they will lose their right to be re-housed by the Local Authority, this seems even more unfair.
Tenants are paying, in more than one way, for our housing crisis.
If you want to have your say about the proposed increase there is a report and further consultation questions here
Information about how to respond to this consultation is given (or perhaps it should be said ‘buried’) on page 28 of the report and the deadline for answers is 27 February 2015.
Many people seem to think landlords should offer longer term tenancies (not sure I agree) but this isn’t going to help that cause if eviction becomes even more costly.
Quite the reverse I would have thought! I think this is a retrograde step for tenants.
That’s what I meant. If the cost of bringing a possession claim increase, landlords might be unwilling to offer longer tenancies which is (allegedly) what every tenant wants.
Are there any stats on how often a landlord actually recovers the court fee from the (ex-) tenant?
In a more general perspective, I think that anything that makes eviction more difficult and costly ends up being mostly felt by the more vulnerable tenants:
Indeed, the higher the risk for the landlord the more careful he will be selecting tenants.
I don’t know of any official figures.
However when I did eviction work I think I can count on the fingers of one hand (or maybe two) the cases where the landlord recovered the costs (over more than 20 years). However I always got a costs order against the tenant.
Funnily enough, just before Christmas I did a s. 21 possession claim in which, once we got to the enforcement stage (and in which we applied to kick up to the High Court for enforcement because it was quicker and the costs of so doing were less than the interest my client was incurring on delayed completion of the sale of the property), the tenant not only volunteered to pay the costs, but did so as well before the eviction date.
I was more than a little nonplussed by this.
Speaking of enforcing in the High Court, I recommend it heartily. It costs more but it is a lot faster and if you have a non-paying tenant or are mid-sale it can save you in the long run.
It also shows up just how iffy Councils are being when they say, “wait for the warrant” all the time.
I always had major problems using the Sheriffs every time I tried, but I’m glad it works for you. http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2011/03/09/using-the-high-court-sheriffs-for-evictions/
The main problem is getting the DJ to agree the transfer to the High Court …
Who do I lobby to stop the court fees being increased ? I have had to pay about 4 times now and its always been Housing benefit tenants who have kept the housing benefit and not paid the rent. Although I have won I have never had the fees or rent arrears paid back and they disappear without paying and its too expensive to chase them for 50p a week ????!!!!
This is one reason why landlords don’t want to take on benefit tenants …
I think it depends on the case, whether a DJ will transfer up for enforcement. If there are, for instance, massive arrears which the tenant is flatly refusing to pay, then you can argue that permission to transfer up is required because of a serious and ongoing prejudice to the Claimant if one had to wait weeks for a County Court bailiff. Or if the property is being sold and the failure of the Defendant to vacate as per the possession order is delaying completion, one can argue the same prejudice is accruing to the Claimant in the form of interest and potentially a damages claim for consequential losses.
Yes the DJ will probably agree then.
However they do often refuse, something which some Sheriffs for example tend to keep quiet about when promoting their services.
It is not guaranteed that you will be able to use the sheriffs.