Labour's war on landlords triggers record wave of eviction claims
The Government aims to ban 'no-fault' evictions next year as part of its Renters' Rights Bill, which will also make it harder for landlords to increase rents.
The move has sparked panic among property investors, with the number of possession claims by private landlords surpassing 30,000 for the first time ever in 2024.
The data, from HM Courts & Tribunals Service, also shows that during Labour's first three months in power, the number of claims by private landlords hit 7,781 – their highest quarterly total since records began in 2009.
The Renters' Rights Bill, which is being spearheaded by housing secretary, Angela Rayner, is set to become law by this summer. It was designed in response to the Conservative government's Renters Reform Bill which did not pass into law before Parliament was dissolved.
Both pieces of legislature sought to ban so-called 'no-fault' evictions which aim to make it harder for landlords to take their properties back from tenants.
The number of successful 'no-fault' evictions soared 20.3pc in England between 2023 and 2024 to their highest tally since 2017.
Landlords can apply for a possession order if the tenant has broken the terms of the rental agreement. This could be the result of excessive arrears, causing damage to the property or engaging in anti-social behaviour.
Most successful actions in court used to result in a suspended order, where the judge rules the tenant can remain under certain conditions.
But outright orders – which impose a date when the home must be vacated, usually between 2 weeks and a month of the hearing – have surged. They have become more common every year from 2006 onwards, and since the pandemic, they make up roughly eight in 10 of all orders.
58,932 were issued by county courts in Britain in 2024, the highest annual total since 2017.
Only when such orders aren't respected can private landlords apply for bailiffs to evict the tenant. This occurred 9,012 times in England last year – more than any other year going back to 2000.
Again, the surge came just after Sir Keir Starmer entered Number 10. The 2,373 evictions between July and September 2024 topped any other quarter on record.
But landlords also currently have recourse to Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, which allows them to push for an earlier move-out date without having to supply a reason.
When such notices are valid and the date isn't respected, they can apply for accelerated possession orders which can see forced eviction through much quicker.
English courts received 32,287 accelerated procedure claims by landlords in 2024, more than during any other year since 2016. These resulted in 11,373 evictions.
Average asking rents hit £1,369 in England by the end of 2024 – having risen by an all-time record high 9.3pc over the year to November, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
But in the capital, just under a year since they crossed £2,000 for the first time, the equivalent increase was 11.6pc, pushing the average to £2,220.
Of the top 10 local authorities where the rate of private landlord possession claims were highest, seven were in London. Waltham Forrest led the way with 762 per 100,000 households.
Asking rents in the borough of Brent soared 26.9pc last year, more than anywhere else in the country. The rate of claims there (225 per 100,000) was almost double the average across all councils (120).
A Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government spokesman said: 'We are transforming a housing system, which has left millions of renters trapped under the constant fear of a Section 21 eviction coming through the door.
'Our Renters' Rights Bill will soon become law, putting an end to no-fault evictions, giving tenants greater security in their homes whilst empowering them to rightfully challenge unfair rent hikes and poor conditions.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
18 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Asylum seekers to be removed from Essex hotel as council granted injunction
Epping Forest District Council had asked a judge to issue an interim injunction stopping migrants from being accommodated at the Bell Hotel in Epping. The injunction sought by the council meant the hotel's owner, Somani Hotels Limited, would have had to stop housing asylum seekers there within 14 days. The hotel has been at the centre of a series of protests in recent weeks after an asylum seeker who was staying there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. In a ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Eyre granted the temporary injunction, but extended the time limit by which the hotel must stop housing asylum seekers to September 12. He also refused to give Somani Hotels the green light to challenge his ruling, but the company could still ask the Court of Appeal for the go-ahead to appeal against the judgment. In his judgment, he said that while the council had not 'definitively established' that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules, 'the strength of the claimant's case is such that it weighs in favour' of granting the injunction. He continued that the 'risk of injustice is greater' if a temporary injunction was not granted. A further hearing on whether the injunction should be made permanent is expected to be held at a later date, and is expected to last two days. Several protests and counter-protests have been held in the town since a then-resident at the hotel was accused of trying to kiss a teenage girl. Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu has denied charges against him and is due to stand trial later this month. A second man who resides at the hotel, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, has separately been charged with seven offences, while several other men have been charged over disorder outside the hotel. The council said last week it was seeking an injunction due to 'unprecedented levels of protest and disruption' in connection with asylum seeker accommodation. Chris Whitbread, leader of the council, said the situation 'cannot go on' but the Government 'is not listening'. At a hearing on Friday, barristers for the council said that the site's 'sole lawful use' was as a hotel and that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules by using it to house asylum seekers. Philip Coppel KC, for the authority, said the situation was 'wholly unacceptable' and provided a 'feeding ground for unrest'. He said: 'There has been what can be described as an increase in community tension, the catalyst of which has been the use of the Bell Hotel to place asylum seekers.' Mr Coppel continued: 'It is not the asylum seekers who are acting unlawfully. It is the defendant, by allowing the hotel to be used to house asylum seekers.' He added: 'It really could not be much worse than this.' Piers Riley-Smith, for Somani Hotels, said that 'disagreement with Government policy' did not justify a 'draconian' injunction and that there would be 'hardship' caused to the company and those housed at the hotel. He also said that contracts to house asylum seekers were a 'financial lifeline' for the hotel, which was only 1% full in August 2022, when it was open to paying customers. Mr Riley-Smith said: 'It is clear that recent protests have expanded far beyond the local community and have gone into concerns about wider ideological and political issues from those outside the community. 'Those particular ideological, non-community concerns are not relevant to planning.' Following the ruling, Mr Whitbread said: 'I am delighted. This is great news for our residents. The last few weeks have placed an intolerable strain on our community but today we have some great news.' He continued: 'Home Office policy ignores the issues and concerns of local residents that the council represents. 'Today we have made a step towards redressing the imbalance and showing that local people do have some say, whatever the Home Office thinks.' Before judgment was handed down on Tuesday, barristers for the Home Office asked to intervene in the case, citing the 'substantial impact' caused to the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, in performing her legal duties to asylum seekers. Edward Brown KC, for the department, told the court that moving asylum seekers in 'extremely short order' would cause a 'very significant operational burden' and 'particular acute difficulties' for the Government. But Mr Justice Eyre dismissed the Home Office's bid, stating that the department's involvement was 'not necessary'.
South Wales Guardian
18 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Asylum seekers to be removed from Essex hotel as council granted injunction
Epping Forest District Council had asked a judge to issue an interim injunction stopping migrants from being accommodated at the Bell Hotel in Epping. The injunction sought by the council meant the hotel's owner, Somani Hotels Limited, would have had to stop housing asylum seekers there within 14 days. The hotel has been at the centre of a series of protests in recent weeks after an asylum seeker who was staying there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. In a ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Eyre granted the temporary injunction, but extended the time limit by which the hotel must stop housing asylum seekers to September 12. He also refused to give Somani Hotels the green light to challenge his ruling, but the company could still ask the Court of Appeal for the go-ahead to appeal against the judgment. In his judgment, he said that while the council had not 'definitively established' that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules, 'the strength of the claimant's case is such that it weighs in favour' of granting the injunction. He continued that the 'risk of injustice is greater' if a temporary injunction was not granted. A further hearing on whether the injunction should be made permanent is expected to be held at a later date, and is expected to last two days. Several protests and counter-protests have been held in the town since a then-resident at the hotel was accused of trying to kiss a teenage girl. Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu has denied charges against him and is due to stand trial later this month. A second man who resides at the hotel, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, has separately been charged with seven offences, while several other men have been charged over disorder outside the hotel. The council said last week it was seeking an injunction due to 'unprecedented levels of protest and disruption' in connection with asylum seeker accommodation. Chris Whitbread, leader of the council, said the situation 'cannot go on' but the Government 'is not listening'. At a hearing on Friday, barristers for the council said that the site's 'sole lawful use' was as a hotel and that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules by using it to house asylum seekers. Philip Coppel KC, for the authority, said the situation was 'wholly unacceptable' and provided a 'feeding ground for unrest'. He said: 'There has been what can be described as an increase in community tension, the catalyst of which has been the use of the Bell Hotel to place asylum seekers.' Mr Coppel continued: 'It is not the asylum seekers who are acting unlawfully. It is the defendant, by allowing the hotel to be used to house asylum seekers.' He added: 'It really could not be much worse than this.' Piers Riley-Smith, for Somani Hotels, said that 'disagreement with Government policy' did not justify a 'draconian' injunction and that there would be 'hardship' caused to the company and those housed at the hotel. He also said that contracts to house asylum seekers were a 'financial lifeline' for the hotel, which was only 1% full in August 2022, when it was open to paying customers. Mr Riley-Smith said: 'It is clear that recent protests have expanded far beyond the local community and have gone into concerns about wider ideological and political issues from those outside the community. 'Those particular ideological, non-community concerns are not relevant to planning.' Following the ruling, Mr Whitbread said: 'I am delighted. This is great news for our residents. The last few weeks have placed an intolerable strain on our community but today we have some great news.' He continued: 'Home Office policy ignores the issues and concerns of local residents that the council represents. 'Today we have made a step towards redressing the imbalance and showing that local people do have some say, whatever the Home Office thinks.' Before judgment was handed down on Tuesday, barristers for the Home Office asked to intervene in the case, citing the 'substantial impact' caused to the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, in performing her legal duties to asylum seekers. Edward Brown KC, for the department, told the court that moving asylum seekers in 'extremely short order' would cause a 'very significant operational burden' and 'particular acute difficulties' for the Government. But Mr Justice Eyre dismissed the Home Office's bid, stating that the department's involvement was 'not necessary'.
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Account tied to Trump nominee posted conspiracy theories about Epstein, the 2020 election and Covid, report says
A social media account tied to President Donald Trump 's controversial pick to take over the Bureau of Labor Statistics has a history of posting various far-right conspiracy theories – the latest eyebrow-raising report to emerge about what is often a nonpartisan nominee. Last week, Trump announced he would nominate Erwin John 'EJ' Antoni III, the chief economist at The Heritage Foundation, the conservative group that created Project 2025, to replace former BLS commissioner Erika McEntarfer. A surface-level review of Antoni, 37, shows that he is a loyal Trump supporter who has aligned himself with the current administration's ideals – contributing to Project 2025, bashing former president Joe Biden's record, and even being a 'bystander' at the January 6 attack on the Capitol. But a more in-depth look at Antoni's history online indicates that a now-deleted X account, which once used Antoni's name, posted theories about Jeffrey Epstein's death, Covid-19's origins, and the validity of the 2020 presidential election, according to WIRED. A website archive of the account 'PhDofbombsaway,' shows that it used the name 'Dr. Erwin J. Antoni III,' 'Dr. J.,' as well as 'Dr. Curtis LeMay,' – an apparent reference to the Air Force general largely credited with planning and executing mass bombings on Japan during World War II, as well as advocating for nuclear weapon usage. The account's profile picture was of a fiery mushroom cloud, not unlike the one associated with nuclear weapon detonations. 'All or nothing. Do it die,' the account posted in late November 2020 in response to a tweet encouraging Republicans to stand up to 'fraudulently mailed machines.' The account consistently re-posted false claims about election fraud and theories about stolen ballots from prominent accounts. On January 5, 2021, hours before the attack on the Capitol, the account posted a reference to violence in the Bible while responding to a tweet from Trump in which he encouraged Republicans to 'fight.' 'Samson has his arms around the temple pillars, and although he may not survive, he will bring it all down on his enemies,' it posted, referring to the story of Samson receiving strength from God to rise up against his enemies. Last week, photos of Antoni outside the Capitol on January 6 circulated online. The White House confirmed Antoni was present as a 'bystander' who wandered over to see coverage of it on the news. Other posts from the account indicate the person running it was ingrained in far-right rhetoric and conspiracy theories. In November 2019, the account responded to a person theorizing about Epstein's death by suicide, claiming, 'Epstein didn't kill himself.' That theory was widely circulated among far-right communities online and continues to be a central part of concerns about government transparency around Epstein. Later that month, the same account replied to a tweet that seemed to make a sexual innuendo about former vice president Kamala Harris with its own. 'She does her best work when life brings her to her knees,' the account wrote. The Independent has asked the White House for comment. Antoni declined to comment to Wired. While the account has since been deleted, Antoni remains present online with an X account that mostly posts Trump-aligned views of the economy or economic data. But his nomination has been subject to criticism even before NBC News reported his presence at the Capitol, or Wired reported about his alleged former X account. The president previously fired McEntarfer, a career civil servant, after expressing dissatisfaction with the BLS's job numbers reports. Trump insinuated, without evidence, that McEntarfer had manipulated the numbers to make the president look bad because the figures did not line up with Trump's rhetoric about the economy. Some economists and lawmakers have expressed concern that Trump's new nominee could be more inclined to alter BLS numbers to appease the president. While there is no rule about who may be the BLS commissioner, they are typically expected to be nonpartisan, given that the BLS is an independent fact-checking arm of the Department of Labor. Upon announcing Antoni's nomination, the president vowed that his nominee would 'ensure that the Numbers released are HONEST and ACCURATE.' Antoni previously tweeted, calling for a 'better' way to collect and disseminate BLS data and criticizing the current method of doing so. Antoni's nomination will require Senate confirmation. So far, at least two Democratic senators have called for the Senate to reject Antoni's nomination.
