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


Loss of Section 21 may not be catastrophe, trade body suggests

The small UK Association of Letting Agents trade body says that the government’s proposal to scrap Section 21 is grabbing headlines but in reality may not be as catastrophic as some suggest.

In a statement on its website, UKALA says that while naturally landlords will feel that they will lose the ability to get possession when they need it., Section 21 is in fact relatively rarely used.

UKALA says: “The statistics show that most landlords do not serve section 21 notices to end tenancies which are in the main ended because the tenant wants to leave. After all the landlord business model works most efficiently when the tenant is paying the rent and looking after the property with the landlord maintaining the property thereby allowing the tenant to live in a safe home. 


“Void periods between tenancies erode the landlord’s return. The landlord may have to plan a bit further ahead, and probably be more cautious about which tenants to take, under these proposals. The tenant is proposed to have to give two months’ notice as well.”

The scrapping of Section 21 has been a flagship demand of pressure groups such as Generation Rent and the campaigning charity Shelter for some years, and experts consider that even a radically different government under a new Prime Minister is unlikely to drop this pledge.

This is even if some other proposals in the recent Fairer Private Rented Sector White Paper fall by the wayside. 

UKALA says: “This is now the government policy and it’s unlikely that they will make a U-turn but it is possible that if landlords and agents put their concerns and ideas to government via their local MP or though UKALA then we may collectively be able to contribute to reshaping the policy to make better law.”

  • icon

    They sound like some sort of joke !

  • icon

    If, as UKALA state, it is rarely used, why the clamour from Polly Bleat, Gen Rent etc to abolish it? The answer is that it is mandatory. That is why Wee Burnie and her gang want repossession to be decided by a tribunal. The property, in Scotland, may belong to the landlord, but they will not be able to sell it Etc without permission.

    The days of the small landlord are numbered. As for it being government policy, well a new PM will want to make an impression and show that they are Conservative as opposed to Boris and his Green/Red administration. That could mean a complete change of direction.

  • icon

    UKALA are talking utter rubbish with this assertion.
    Section 21 exists like any deterrent exists. To prevent conflict. Absolutely right rarely used. But you take it away and just watch the increase in troublesome tenants and then landlords giving up by the thousands.

    We own lots of properties in the PRS. We are great landlords. We care about our tenants! A lot!
    However. We are leaving the market and selling up the day section 21 is taken away. We will not have our investments nationalised. It’s left wing. It will kill the sector. UKALA - show some courage!!

  • icon

    I am afraid that the ultra rich have decided to take your assets as they have been doing for a long time, which is why stooges are found, such as Johnson etc.

  • Matthew Payne

    They miss the point, its not about whether it is used, its the fact it's there to be used if needed, and there will be nothing there to replace what is effectively a Get out of Jail Free card. We all very rarely claim on the various insurance policies we have, but that doesnt mean we dont want to continue to be insured.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up