OFCOM decision Can't Pay special

[Peterbard]

Cheers

[Bailiff Advice]

 

The problem is, as Paul Bohill has pointed out, several times, many Landlords are instead opting to immediately upgrade to the High Court, and send in the HCEO's which means they are arriving to perform the eviction a few days after the hearing, not the 2 months County Court Bailiffs take.

 

My personal opinion is that these Section 42 transfers are frankly a disgrace and this TV programme has highlighted this.

 

Surely it should be the case that such application should be 'on notice' so that the person being evicted has prior warning. I am surprised that in light if what this TV programme has exposed that High Court Masters have not stepped in to stop this shocking abuse.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

But how about looking at it from the other side. On a lot of cases, when they are given notice, they trash the property, set booby traps, barricade the property, get local anti bailiff support groups involved and carry out a host of other anti eviction antics. Its not the section 42 that is the problem, it is the unwillingness of the LA to deal with evictions before the event.

[caledfwlch]

My personal opinion is that these Section 42 transfers are frankly a disgrace and this TV programme has highlighted this.

 

Surely it should be the case that such application should be 'on notice' so that the person being evicted has prior warning. I am surprised that in light if what this TV programme has exposed that High Court Masters have not stepped in to stop this shocking abuse.

 

What can the HC Masters do though, the Landlords and the HCEO's are acting lawfully afaik. The law needs changing, and MP's need to seriously consider whether the High Court is a suitable place to take Eviction hearings.

 

As Grumpy says, the problem is not that the HCEO's are turning up in a few days, its that LA's are refusing to rehouse before physical eviction, they brand anyone who leaves before that point as "intentionally homeless" and refuse to help, which is unlawful, but nobody in power seems to care, maybe its something that needs to be taken to the Local Gov Ombudsman?

 

Grumpy - whilst I am sure some tenants damage the property as you say, I doubt its more than a tiny minority, and if they do such, then the Police exist for dealing with criminal damage, attempting to cause harm with booby traps etc. Why should HCEO's specifically be excused from giving notice of attendance to evict when in every single other area that requires enforcement agents, including County Court EA's also performing evictions? I would be interested to see why you think Landlords and their contracted HCEO's who go to the high court need and should get special dispensation when noone else does.

[brassnecked]

Have to agree with Caled, there is much more that could be done by a LA once an eviction date is known, but these fast track HC/HCEO evictions will catch the LA out also.

[caledfwlch]

Have to agree with Caled, there is much more that could be done by a LA once an eviction date is known, but these fast track HC/HCEO evictions will catch the LA out also.

 

I would have thought that forcing someone to be in contempt of Court, and it is forcing, they are saying if you leave on the date the Court orders you to, then we will brand you intentionally homeless, and thus will not rehouse you, thus forcing you to be in contempt of the Order of the Court would be against Human Rights. I don't believe existing Legislation even says Council's can lawfully brand you intentionally homeless if you leave when the Court orders it, rather than when the EA or HCEO turns up, but the Authorities higher than Council's don't appear willing to do anything about it. I imagine if we suddenly saw a massive upswing in middle class families being treated in this way, then Something Would Be Done of course, especially if they were Tory Voters.

 

It is difficult to imagine that the High Court was ever intended to be a forum for bog standard, non problematic, every day, run of the mill evictions, it is supposed to be there for serious and complex issues, and for large monetary debts. The minimum value of a monetary debt that can be taken to the High Court should be raised to £5,000 and Landlords wanting to process normal evictions banned from using the HC. If you are talking about like a couple of cases on Cant Pay, where the houses were worth a million or two, if not more, and the Tenants facing eviction also owed over £5,000 in rent, and the Landlord wants to pursue an Eviction Order combined with a Money Order for the Rental Arrears, then I could see them being ok for the HC - Landlords risk and almost certain loss in HC Fees mind, since iirc from one case, the HCEO's turned up, House was almost a Mansion, Tenants owed something mad like £15+ grand in arrears, and they had done a flit, only leaving behind furnishings that came with the house, so Landlord was left with being owed £15+, his County Court Fees, the HC Fees for upgrading, and the Fees for sending the HCEO's and them being unsuccessful in getting payment, unless they continued off camera to try and locate the ex tenants. But the sort of people who can run up those sorts of figures in arrears then do a runner without breaking a sweat very likely know exactly what they are doing, and their rights, and thus a HCEO wont be able to outwit them.

[Bailiff Advice]

Can I make an important point about these dreadful fast track Section 42 Applications.

 

If anyone subject to such an application wishes to complain they MUST ensure that their complaint is made as soon as possible to the High Court Enforcement Officers Association (HCEOA). They can only act on any wrongdoing if a complaint is made to their association.

 

Behind the scenes there have been some important developments recently about these applications and when I am able to, I will update the thread. A few regulars who have an interest in this subject on a day to day basis have been PM'd.

[brassnecked]

I would have thought that forcing someone to be in contempt of Court, and it is forcing, they are saying if you leave on the date the Court orders you to, then we will brand you intentionally homeless, and thus will not rehouse you, thus forcing you to be in contempt of the Order of the Court would be against Human Rights. I don't believe existing Legislation even says Council's can lawfully brand you intentionally homeless if you leave when the Court orders it, rather than when the EA or HCEO turns up, but the Authorities higher than Council's don't appear willing to do anything about it. I imagine if we suddenly saw a massive upswing in middle class families being treated in this way, then Something Would Be Done of course, especially if they were Tory Voters.

 

.

They would do something then, if Fast Track evictions are banned, and LA's made to offer help once date given, ten things may improve, However to their detriment when the courts give the councils a kicking on Human Rights, a council will claim that technically they are only homeless when the bailiff kicks them onto the street, and anyway the house allocated may have to be given to someone in greater need under their allocations policy who with their family have therefore a higher priority, as in need the accommodation now not tomorrow when the other person is kicked out. Nasty but then that's what councils seem to do.

[caledfwlch]

They would do something then, if Fast Track evictions are banned, and LA's made to offer help once date given, ten things may improve, However to their detriment when the courts give the councils a kicking on Human Rights, a council will claim that technically they are only homeless when the bailiff kicks them onto the street, and anyway the house allocated may have to be given to someone in greater need under their allocations policy who with their family have therefore a higher priority, as in need the accommodation now not tomorrow when the other person is kicked out. Nasty but then that's what councils seem to do.

 

If you want to make a very high wage, just create a Charitable or NPO organisation providing "private sector" run bedsit Hostels to fill the gap, in areas with high numbers of evictions, and homeless. In fact, I think it can even be done purely as a private company, as ISTR either in one of the dodgy landlord articles or Whistleblower documentaries a couple years ago, in the couple of areas in England they looked at Estate & Letting Agents were doing that, and were putting evicted people and families, including with young children into bedsits where the walls and floors had massive outbreaks of Mould and iirc even fungus growing on the walls, and in a couple of cases, the floors, places so riddled with damp, that you would go to bed with freshly laundered bedding, and it would all be damp through by morning. And the Council's had surveyed all those rooms and judged them fit for habitation!!!

 

If rogue landlords and agents can do that, then I imagine there is a lot of cash to be made for a decent Landlord.

 

Here in Mid Wales there is a Registered Charity who have been running since the 70's, doing things like assisting the homeless and "problem people" such as drug addicts with things like advice, advocacy and social worker type assistance. They have become, or at some point became "a Registered Charity and Company Limited by Guarantee" a distinction that allows them to Trade and generate income from trading and so on, and have gotten into the Hostel game.

 

In Aberystwyth alone, they operate around 6 or 7 Hostels, 1 is where they mainly put people who are either ordinary people, who don't have chaotic lifestyles, no drug or MH issues and are often in full time employment, but for whatever reason have become homeless due to an eviction, and some people from the other Hostels who have been in them long enough to have proven that despite personal issues, such as alchoholism, they have followed the Hostel rules, and have generally been exemplary Residents, offering no problems or trouble, and that place costs around £75 a week, within the Housing Benefit Allowance, if not working.

 

Those other Hostels are generally nightmarish places, whilst some are as above, behave exemplary, and appreciate having a roof, many of the Residents are extremely chaotic - whilst they may obey the rules, or haven't yet been caught breaking them, such as smuggling alcohol in, we are talking about long term drug abusers who would sell their own grannies for a fix, habitual criminals with long strings of convictions, thus Police attendance at the properties to arrest suspects and so on is regular, and some don't care about the rules, and until their license to reside is revoked, will assault, and steal from other residents/each other, have fights outside the doors, just the way you can imagine these places can be like.

 

The figure I know for the weekly cost of these rooms is 5 years out of date, so they have of course, risen, perhaps even dramatically since then, but those Hostels, the 5 or 6 of them, have from 6 to I think 12 or 13 rooms and the Charity charged the Local Authority around £180 a week for each room 5 years ago !!! So there is some serious cash to be generated - of course, the operating costs for the ones with the really rough residents include Night Wardens, but most of them just rely on CCTV. I saw inside a couple of them once, and my impression was that cleaning, decorating & repairing damage was not exactly a priority for the Charity, if even on the "to do list" in the first place