Research by the National Residential Landlords Association reveals that of those private landlords who have served a repossession notice, half have done so because of a tenant’s anti-social or criminal behaviour.
The data shows that of this group of landlords no less than 84 per cent have not received any assistance in tackling such behaviour from their local authority.
Some 75 per cent did not have any help from the police while 67 per cent had either always, or sometimes, faced problems gathering evidence or support from neighbours or fellow tenants to address the behaviour of anti-social tenants.
Outlining the typical problems they face, one landlord told the NRLA: “Sometimes (especially in a house of multiple occupancy) tenants fear to speak up about other tenants acting aggressively or drinking or on drugs, for fear of safety. My tenants have been assaulted by my other tenants and we can't ask them to leave without evidence. Evidence takes time and, in our experience, all the other tenants moved out and we lost money waiting for the bad one to leave”.
The NRLA says concerns about the lack of action to tackle problem behaviour are shared among the public more broadly.
According to polling for the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, of those who experienced anti-social behaviour in the last year, just 26 per cent reported it to the police or local authorities, of which fewer than half (41 per cent) were satisfied with the response they received.
The NRLA is warning that efforts to tackle anti-social behaviour will be made harder when Section 21 repossessions are scrapped in the private rented sector.
Under the Government’s plans, where tenants cause misery for fellow tenants and neighbours, landlords will only be able to repossess a property where the police or local authority have taken action against them.
The Government has agreed to the NRLA’s calls for a roundtable meeting to discuss how to tackle the problem of anti-social behaviour in rented housing. Specifically, the NRLA is calling for a number of measures to ensure effective action against nightmare tenants.
These include implementing in full the recommendations of the Victims Commissioner’s 2019 report on anti-social behaviour plus the prioritisation of anti-social behaviour hearings by the courts with possession orders enforced swiftly thereafter.
The association also says that where the police or local authorities take action in response to a tenant’s anti-social behaviour, it should be a legal requirement to inform the landlord.
NRLA chief executive Ben Beadle says: “The vast majority of tenants and landlords have a good relationship. However, the minority of renters committing anti-social behaviour cause misery for their fellow tenants and communities more widely. They leave many living in fear of giving evidence against them.
“The police and councils are failing to provide the support landlords desperately need to take swift and effective action against nightmare tenants. This needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency before Section 21 repossessions are ended.”
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
This is an accurate article, I work in a job that means I deal with this type of person, I can assure any landlord that if you have an anti social tenant AFTER we lose s21 !! God help you. The piece mentions that the tenant will have to have had “ action “ taken against them by the Council or the Police 👮🏻♀️ Good luck with that. EVIDENCE EVIDENCE…. Saying it is easy, getting it more problematic.
We hardly needed research to tell us something that we know for years and years, anyway it’s good of them to raise to issue.
The solution to all this is to retain and strengthen Section
21, there should be no need for the landlord to go to Court to get his property back, they don’t need a Court Order to move-in, let them have 4 months notice or whatever.
SCRAP THE WHITE PAPER.
AST must be retained the idea of indefinite Tenancies is a non starter, do you really think
landlords are going to invest or continue under this belligerents, have you still not noticed the mass exodus of Private landlords or are you too caught up in the rush to have us replaced by skyscraper Flat land, one of those alone have raised £500’000’000. backing from the City, so you think we don’t know what’s happening cut to flannel. I’ll reserve my comment on Anti- Social Behaviour till later I have things to deal with.
I was going to echo Simon’s post. There will be a high bar of evidence required. Police and LAs will be reluctant to get involved. You will probably find it impossible to deal with this type of tenant.
I have a nightmare already and that’s with S21 now being issued with endless complaints about the property.
Landlords must not cede ANY further ground to these woke lefty politicians and pressure groups.
Good tenants now will have free reign to turn bad knowing you can’t get them out.
As Michael says LLs shouldn’t have to go to court to get their property my back.
Going back to the 90s I had neighbours from both sides of a terraced house come after me wanting me to get rid of my troublesome tenants, when I told them to complain to the council, police, put their complaints in writing non would do so, my young tenants did go, they were given a brand new housing association house, so you see the bad in society are the ones that get rewarded
Another bit of research the NRLA won’t bother to publicise. They are a toothless organisation easily ignored by the government. We are probably the only people who will ever read this research and as has already been said we already know it!
Ben Beadles doesn't exactly fight. Sitting their calmly on a committee meeting with the govt, Shelter et al. He shrugs "I don't have a problem" with Section 21 going.
Well I'm an NRLA member and I ******* DO! What are we paying our membership for?
The PSL will receive no help from the Council for the simple reason if the tenant is evicted via the Courts then the Council has a duty to house the evicted tenant but has nowhere to house them!
That’s the main reason why the Council’s wants rid of Section. 21.
They don’t want people turning up at the Civic Centres waving a S.21 Court Order to be housed.
The truth is many of S.21 notice’s were issued or instigated by the Tenants themselves and if landlords didn’t cooperate, he knew he was in for a rough time, any stats on this ? Oh thought not.
Please login to comment