By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Graham Awards


Activists protest outside agency demanding it ‘sacks’ landlord client

A protest has been held outside a lettings agency in Manchester by tenants demanding that the firm ‘sacks’ one of its client landlords.

The protest is reported to have been held outside Mustafa and Co Property Management in Levenshulme.

It is claimed that the issue arose after a long-standing dispute between a tenant and landlord culminated in the allegation that locks were changed at a property while the renter was away over the Christmas break.


The agency - which is said to have agreed to enter discussions with the tenants’ group Acorn - has been contacted by Letting Agent Today, asking for comment.

  • PossessionFriendUK PossessionFriend

    Very slippery slope, I must say. This is nothing less than 'Rent-a-thug ' tactics

  • icon

    There is no way to have an opinion without a lot more information and I don't want to waste my time reciting click bait left or right wing opinions.

  • icon
    • 11 January 2020 23:53 PM

    But isn't this pretty basic stuff.
    Like it or not no matter how much of an arsehole a tenant is locks CANNOT be changed unless the tenant is given a key.
    That then somewhat defeats the object of the exercise!
    Those of us who have needed to evict would have loved to have changed locks.
    But we didn't due to the risk of being prosecuted under the Prevention of Eviction Act.
    I'm afraid this is just one of the penal eviction requirements against LL.
    Getting rid of wrongun tenants is far from easy.
    But it is a business risk that every LL should factor into their business model for every unit.
    Trouble is very few LL do.
    So when they end up with a wrongun tenant it is usually financially devastating.
    Not that the likes of Shelter will EVER accept this is the case.
    The eviction process is scheduled to become even more difficult and expensive.
    Many LL will sell up as a consequence.
    It is pointless being in business if you can't easily get rid of someone who refuses to pay for the service provided and is assisted by the law to remain in a rental property for a long time.
    This is what will happen with the abolishment of the AST and S21.
    In no way will any S8 process be as functional as S21.
    If it was made so it would somewhat defeat the object of the exercise in abolishing the AST and S21 in the first place!


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up