Suddenl;y we are thrust into a new world, where the landlords rights have significantly erroded (the clue is in the title) and the tenant is king in your property. He can stay in your property as a sitting tenant under the same pre 1988 assured tenancy (bar a few extra rules) which prevented the expansion of the private housing market prior to 1988 until the section 21 appears. The betrayal is real and come to pass. The tenant can give two months notice when he wants to leave, and you have to have a court process to get your property back where the tenant has to do something wrong to obtain possession unless you want to sell. Have we gone backwards?

One extra rule is that you can give notice that you want to sell the property. The new rules make this a rolling contract, lets say it is monthly, but landlords beware. If you let your property and in six months time you need to sell it and evict your tenant, the rolling contract rules reverts or flips in favour of the renter who can stay for a full twelve months before you give a four month notice. This makes your contract with him different to his contract with you which can be described by some as un british or  un fair. Your contract with him, is a fixed twevle month term in his favour even though its symultaniously a rolling monthly contract??. He has a different contract with you. He can give two months to leave. We are unsure as to where the spin describing this as a fairer set of rules is justified. After all, the property belongs to the landlord. Where did his rights go? Lets hope a government sees sence once the market has erroded, to entice landlords back for him to evict on a whim as shelter puts it. 

Your investment is making the expected returns and you have a good relationship with your tenant then thats ok isn't it. If the tenant stops paying the rent he can now accumulate three months arrears before you can serve a notice. Thats fairer for him isn't it? But for the unscrupulios tenant this is a gift. So you serve the new fangled section 8 notice previously a 14 day notice which is now a four week notice. Is all this extra time for the tenant to solve his issues or extra time to live rent free for longer? 

Did the inventer of a rule come from his naieve fantisy vision of reality, or purposely make a rule to give the none payer more rights to live rent free for longer? How is the landlord protected with these more rights for tenants?

Three months arrears (two months and one day actually) plus 4 weeks notice then you can take it to court.

In the olden days prior to covid the court stuck strictly to the rules so that a hearing took place by eight weeks after a two week notice. That has gone by the wayside. The original rules were not there to protect the tenant, they were there to damage control and limit the loss for the landlord. If you are on a tight budjet paying a mortgage for which you get no tax relief on the interest, this extended ludicrous protection for the tenant could compeletly wreck your situation.

Now all tenants who are in arrears will end up with a county court judgement which was avoided with the section 21. Which means they can counterclain. And they will and jobs for the boys, shelter and other soliciotor firms.

The word fair is a double edged sword and should apply to all so when Maggy Thatcher opened the market with the section 21 and the rules on section 8 it was to protect the property owner. 

Messey as it is we can help you thought his maze so please call and lets have a friendly chat..