UK Landlord Forum / Life

With the recent significant increase in the use of High Court enforcement officers evicting residential tenants it has become clear that not all of these evictions have been conducted legally.

The potential cost implications for a landlord for incorrectly evicting a tenant could be huge as the claims for damages could not only come from the tenant themselves, but also from the Council that had to put them into emergency accommodation.

In the last 18 months the High Court enforcement sector has been flooded with small 'franchise' bailiff firms operating under the authority of a single authorised High Court Enforcement Officer. Whilst many act correctly it has become apparent that some of these firms understanding of the law is lacking to say the least, offering guaranteed 7 day evictions without the need for transferring the County Court order for possession to the High Court for enforcement.

Whilst it is understandable that every landlord wants possession of their property without the lengthy delays regularly quoted by the County Court Bailiffs but the potential claim for damages off the back of an illegal eviction could literally be huge!

At present, a High Court enforcement officer can ONLY use a standard writ of possession to evict trespassers. This means squatters and NOT a tenant that remains in a property after a possession date.

Accordingly, to use a High Court enforcement officer to conduct and eviction of a residential tenant they MUST obtain leave from the County Court under Section 42 of the County Court Act 1984. Without this any writ of possession enforced is invalid and any action taken under it illegal.

If an HCEO has evicted your tenant illegally then the tenant, Council and any other affected party may have a claim for considerable damages from you the landlord, the company that evicted them and the authorised HCEO personally.

In the last few weeks we have been asked to provide the Order granting S42 and the authority for an HCEO to enforce a residential possession order. This is no problem for us and these have been provided and accepted.

If you have used the services of one of these 'franchise' HCEO firms it would be prudent to now demand to see the order allowing the HCEO to undertake the eviction. Be advised this is not the writ of possession itself and is usually a separate standard looking court order. It is this that may be demanded by the tenant or Council.

If they cannot produce this, you could be looking at a claim for damages landing on your doormat any day soon.

Food for thought.

Sorry Dis-agree.

When you go before the master at the High Court, he can authorise the writ, with or without the transfer up process, it is completely down to discretion of the master.

Section 42, is not so important if it is missed, it can be rectified at the High Court.

To avoid delays if its required then request section 42 transfer up.

Most District Judges tend to refuse a transfer up. There has  been several complaints of thuggish behaviour by some "HEOs". like visiting a residential eviction at 6am with kids in the house, no risk assessment to check for children sick elderly. (anyway)

As a side note, the private sector get something good going, then several idiots ruin by being completely idiotic about it, then the government end up regulating it.

I bet you guys are great fun at parties!