- Research confirms link between tenant complaints and revenge eviction
- PA Housing wins court case and sets precedent for social housing
" />
Posted 27.08.18
Citizens Advice: Article link
Private renters in England who formally complain about issues such as damp and mould in their home have an almost one-in-two (46%) chance of being issued an eviction notice within 6 months, according to a new report 'Touch and go' released by Citizens Advice.
The charity estimates this has affected about 141,000 tenants since laws attempting to ban revenge evictions were introduced in 2015.
The research found complaining dramatically increases a renter's chance of getting an eviction notice when compared to people who do not complain.
Tenants who had received a section 21 "no-fault eviction" notice were:
The Charity argues the figures prove 2015 laws designed to prevent families and other tenants in the private rented sector from being evicted after raising a complaint have not worked.
*****
Posted 03.08.18
PA Housing: Article link
The Court of Appeal has ruled that PA Housing had not evicted a tenant unfairly or acted disproportionately, and that it had followed the correct steps in dealing with the tenant, who had raised a counter-argument of disability discrimination.
Initially, PA Housing instigated possession against the tenant on the grounds that he was causing nuisance and ASB. However, the tenant argued that this behaviour was a consequence of his disability. As a result, PA Housing suspended the possession in order to protect the tenant's disability under the Equality Act, and agreed that his home would not be re-possessed as long as he didn't breach his tenancy again. The court ruled that this was a proportionate response.
When the customer breached the terms of his tenancy again, PA Housing was left with no choice but to obtain a warrant to re-possess the property. The tenant argued against this, which led to a hearing.
There was no change of circumstance which had led the tenant to re-offend, and so PA Housing argued that there was nothing for the court to reconsider. The judge agreed and dismissed the tenant's application to stay in the property, ruling that PA Housing did not discriminate against him because of his disability.
