Landlords and agents operating in the private rented sector have been warned that they may be unable to evict tenants who fail to pay their rent or commit anti-social behaviour – because of their human rights.
The warning, from the Residential Landlords Association, follows a ruling by the Supreme Court. While the case concerned a social tenant and landlord, a second case is in the pipeline where a private tenant is relying on Article 8 in the European Convention on Human Rights to prevent eviction.
Hounslow Council had tried to evict tenant Rebecca Powell. She owed more than £3,500 in arrears after the authority housed her in temporary accommodation after she became homeless in April 2007. She was entitled to £15,000 in housing benefit but had not applied for it properly.
Having begun legal proceedings to evict her, the council was prevented from doing so after Ms Powell lodged an appeal claiming that the move breached her right under Article 8 to have respect for a person’s home.
Powell’s argument was upheld by Lords Hope and Phillips who ruled that the council had not considered whether it was ‘proportionate’ to evict Miss Powell and ordered that the eviction be quashed. The court left open the question of whether the same principle applies in the private rented sector.
Richard Jones, solicitor for the Residential Landlords Association, explained: “At present, landlords in the private rented sector are able to begin eviction proceedings based on a tenant breaching the terms of their contract if they fall into arrears on their rent by two months.
“Once a tenancy is ended, landlords can evict using Section 21 – the so-called ‘no fault notice only’ ground for possession.
“However, recent rulings by the Supreme Court raise the very real prospect now that it could become all but impossible to evict a tenant given the lack of clarity over what ‘proportionate’ action would look like.
“I am aware of at least one case where a private tenant is relying on Article 8 to try to avoid eviction which has gone to the Appeal Court. We are waiting to see what happens in this case.
“Even if this does not go ahead, another is going to come along and the question is going to have to be dealt with sooner or later.
“We very much hope that the courts will ultimately decide that Article 8 does not apply in the Private Rented Sector. This is the Government view.
“However, if it does, we would then call on the Government to work with the judiciary and EU allies to establish a clear definition of ‘proportionate’ action, to provide much-needed certainty to the housing sector as a whole.”
.png)
Comments
This is, unfortunately, what happens when junior ministers and civil servants come up with an idea, put it through the Bill process and create a new law WITHOUT consulting the judiciary first.
it seems that the UK are the only numpties in the EU to actually read or implement human rights even when its to the extreme.
no other country goes as far as us and for Germany they only make the rules does not mean they have to stick to them.
Government need to just start using there little brains and doing whats right for us as a country and forget everyone else. would be a cracker to see how much HMRC lost if this case goes against PRC as what landlord would owe tax? Gov would sure act then!
...so what about those landlords who hold their portfolio in their own limited company?
London Agent
is almost 100% right.
Stop panicking - anyone who has studied these cases and their background in detail knows unless the Court takes the most bizarre decision in legal history then in terms of private lettings (and contracts) this case can go nowhere.
The Human Rights Act applies to bodies corporate etc, not individuals in relationships with each other - unless you are a despot and are massacring your people but even then that is War Crimes etc.
The Landlord has human rights as well - in the private sector this will be a set-off job.
If it is not then estate agents can look forward to happy days as probably at least 50% of all property in the PRS will come onto the market in the next 2 years.
Mind they won't be able to sell them as the market will have collapsed.
The social housing element is significant as a local authority has a duty to provide housing - a private landlord does not. They have free choice.
S21 has nothing to do with proportionate action. Its a mechanism to end a fixed term tenancy and sits in statute.
Eviction under s8 is different - but if Judges decide to override the mandatory grounds and instead rule they have to be 'proportionate' then that will prove interesting as there are so many authorities which would be overruled. The '2 months in arrears' rule would effectively cease to exist in favour of 'is eviction proportionate.
A free country? Democratic? This country is in a complete mess over almost everything - not just property legislation. Common sense and an understanding of the real world among major party politicians has all but vanished. Time we all woke up and stopped voting for them and vote for independents or minorities?
The convention of human rights was introduced to protect citizens of countries who were being persecuted. What the hell has it got to do with a tenant who is not paying his/ her rent! In any case what about the landlords human right to receive his rent under the terms of the Tenancy Agreement.
The sooner this Government ignores these stupid decisions the better - the French certainly do.