Sutton Council accused of advising tenants to wait for the bailiffs

11:00am Thursday 31st January 2013 in News By Mike Pyle

Sutton Council accused of advising tenants to wait for the bailiffs Sutton Council accused of advising tenants to wait for the bailiffs

Allegations the council has been advising private rental tenants to wait until the bailiffs kick them out before they are given emergency housing have prompted an internal investigation.

Sutton landlords said they have been left out of pocket after tenants they planned to evict refused to leave until bailiffs arrive, on the advice of Sutton Council.

The council said it was not its policy to tell people to stay in accommodation after their eviction dates and that it merely pointed out tenants legal rights, but said it would scrutinise the way it communicates with private rental tenants who turn to the council for emergency housing.

An email exchange between a council housing officer and a tenant faced with eviction, seen by the Sutton Guardian, showed the council explaining tenants do not have to leave their properties until a court orders them to.

Iliana Tchilingirian, personal adviser in homelessness prevention and housing advice for the council, wrote: “If you are still there after the possession order date has passed, your landlady would have to go back to court. She would then ask the judge to enforce the order.

“The judge then issues a bailiff’s notice stating both the date and time they will hand back possession to your landlady.

“That is the final date by which you must legally leave.”

Landlord George Major, of Bourne Way, who is one of the longest standing Pearly Kings, sold one of his two houses, but the sale has been thrown into jeopardy by the tenant in the house refusing to move out until the bailiffs come.

Mr Major said: “I’m 75 and my wife’s not far behind. We just want to get back into our house, but the tenant won’t move until we pay to have the bailiffs round.

“Now we’re the ones facing homelessness.”

Councillor Jayne McCoy said: “I have arranged for this matter to be formally scrutinised.

“We do not have a blanket policy to advise tenants to ‘hang on’ in properties, but we do advise them of their rights and the options they have.”

Councillor Tony Shields called for the council to look into the way it advises tenants at a meeting earlier this month.

Comments(11)

lolliestar says...
11:36am Thu 31 Jan 13

When me and my partner separated, and i couldn't afford the rent on the privately rented house we were living in on just my income i went to the council to find out about renting a council property and they advised me that i would not be offered any accommodation for myself and my children until we were removed by bailiffs. This meant that the £1000 deposit money that i had paid at the start of the lease was lost on the court costs and the only emergency accommodation offered was a bail hostel far from my children's school, which would have meant getting 3 buses in the morning. Ended up moving into my parents house (sleeping on the sofa as no spare rooms) for 6 months. It seemed strange to me that they made it so difficult for me and my young children when i was not asking for any housing benefits or anything for free i was working and wanting to pay rent, i just couldn't afford to privately rent, council rent would have been no problem.

Report this post »

lolliestar says...
12:21pm Thu 31 Jan 13

Yes public housing is public funded but i am working so am paying taxes towards this! Also if i wasn't eligible then why was i told i was due to the fact that i had a low income and after 6 months i was eventually given a council property!

Report this post »

lolliestar says...
1:15pm Thu 31 Jan 13

Also wasn't criticizing the housing adviser i had, she was lovely and was just following procedure, just thought things could have been dealt with better. We were accepted by the council as homeless but were still made to wait for 6 months before even being offered temporary accommodation which were living in for nearly 3 years and no doubt would still be in now (so still technically according to the council would be homeless as accommodation was temporary), luckily i managed to get a better job and save enough for a deposit and being a key worker managed to buy a house under the key workers scheme. I think i was quite lucky to have family not to far away, i have a friend who had to sleep in her car for 4 nights with her children as Sutton council wouldn't help her at first, she eventually was given a room at hostel also miles from her children's school. She was also accepted as homeless and was working but on a low income. @IndirectLemon you seem to be taking my first comment personally i'm guessing you work for the council lol!

Report this post »

grumbles of says...
6:10pm Thu 31 Jan 13

This is disgraceful, how dare you name an employee who is clearly just doing her job of advising people if their rights.

Did you actually speak to her? Have you considered she, like many Council Employees, probably lives in the local area? Her name is not exactly 'Jane Smith is it?

It seems the real shock of this story is a landlord is unaware of the legal ramifications of renting a property, this paper has once again taken a chance to 'bash' the Council and some poor woman is getting grief for doing her job!

Report this post »

Marie from Sutton says...
6:44pm Thu 31 Jan 13

5 Years after moving into my rented accommotation, I received a letter yesterday informing that my rent will increase by 45% (first rise). There it goes: two third of my salary and still have to pay council tax and bills.
I am a tax payer, I work in the NHS in admin so not very well off and I will not ask for any government help and would not get any probably. Do not drive (I cannot afford a car) no cable, nor new tech mobile phone and have just worked out that I will have to live on £50 a week.
I would be better off on the dole but I have pride and will keep on working.
Horrified by the price of a studio in Sutton. Was kicked out of the council bidding for affordable property a few months ago as I am working.
Yes, could afford a room at the age of 52 and my kids could not come and visit.
Not sure what to do and putting on a brave face.

Report this post »

robdob says...
8:41am Fri 1 Feb 13

Tenants' rights ain't news.

Whatever your opinion on the legal process you can't blame the council or let alone a well-meaning adviser for clearly communicating it to it's residents.

This article is pointless filler at best, shamefully unethical "journalism" at worst.

Come on Guardian, pull your finger out, admit you screwed up and remove the adviser's name.

An apology wouldn't go amiss either.

Report this post »

flibblywibble2 says...
2:09pm Fri 1 Feb 13

robdob wrote:
Tenants' rights ain't news. Whatever your opinion on the legal process you can't blame the council or let alone a well-meaning adviser for clearly communicating it to it's residents. This article is pointless filler at best, shamefully unethical "journalism" at worst. Come on Guardian, pull your finger out, admit you screwed up and remove the adviser's name. An apology wouldn't go amiss either.
Pardon me, dear - but I think that forcing your landlord to pay out for bailiffs and court orders just so they can reclaim their rightful property is unethical.

As you must be given notice of your tenancy ending, and it doesn't take long to find somewhere else (I have had to do this myself when my landlord sold-up), a request for emergency housing would suggest that the tenants can't afford another private let. That raises the question of why they have been asked to leave. One possibility is rent arrears.

Personally I would not consider it my 'right' to squat in somebody else's house, drag out legal proceedings for weeks or even months, cause them huge amounts of stress and possibly ruin them financially.

Report this post »

flibblywibble2 says...
2:20pm Fri 1 Feb 13

Marie from Sutton wrote:
5 Years after moving into my rented accommotation, I received a letter yesterday informing that my rent will increase by 45% (first rise). There it goes: two third of my salary and still have to pay council tax and bills. I am a tax payer, I work in the NHS in admin so not very well off and I will not ask for any government help and would not get any probably. Do not drive (I cannot afford a car) no cable, nor new tech mobile phone and have just worked out that I will have to live on £50 a week. I would be better off on the dole but I have pride and will keep on working. Horrified by the price of a studio in Sutton. Was kicked out of the council bidding for affordable property a few months ago as I am working. Yes, could afford a room at the age of 52 and my kids could not come and visit. Not sure what to do and putting on a brave face.
Isn't it reassuring to know that since reforming the rules to 'discourage people from relying on benefits' working families must still pay the full amount of council tax and do not qualify for tax credits or housing benefit, but if nobody works in your family (even out of choice), you can claim housing benefit, jobseekers etc, and you only have to pay up to £300 towards council tax every year. How very fair. So while I work full time to pay for my 'studio' (bedsit), the jobless family across the road have a 3-bed-semi, a seemingly endless supply of new expensive toys which are left broken on the lawn within days, and go on holiday every year. Hmmm. Maybe I should look into my 'rights', because I'd love to afford their lifestyle.

Report this post »

robdob says...
2:25pm Fri 1 Feb 13

@flibblywibble2 - I don't disagree with you, but this is a systemic issue, the only thing the council are guilty of is is making tenants aware of their rights.

It would be unethical for the council to favour landlords by withholding this information.

If there's a story here it's not a local one, and certainly not a personal one, as the inexcusable naming of the adviser in this reprehensible article implies.

Report this post »

flibblywibble2 says...
3:03pm Fri 1 Feb 13

People should think less about their 'rights' and just do what IS right.

I don't believe landlords would be 'favoured' by the council advising tenants to leave by the date requested. Tenancy agreements are very clear on this and we all sign them.

Whether this is a systemic issue or not, any legal advice such as this should have been balanced with moral guidance. Just because something is technically legal, it doesn't mean we should do it or be advised to do it.

Encouraging disruptive and damaging behaviour, however 'legal', is incredibly irresponsible. In some cases this advice could open the tenants up to hostility, which seems rather dangerous to me.

Also, just for those who think landlords are the root of the world's problems -putting a landlord out of business isn't going to magically bestow me with the money to buy a house myself, it will just ruin somebody's life.

Report this post »

robdob says...
3:22pm Fri 1 Feb 13

Of course, but then every situation is different, and arguably being expected to hit the streets just because your landlord wants to sell the property out from under you and retire to the Caribbean isn't right either. Extreme example I know, but it must happen!

Looking back at the excerpts from the adviser's email, I would say her advice is balanced and impartial; she's not "encouraging disruptive and damaging behaviour" she's just explaining what will happen next should the tenant decide to exercise her right to have the matter heard in court.

I don't believe landlords are the root of the worlds problems. Again, every situation and person is different. But the bottom line is landlords wouldn't be in business without tenants, so they deserve at least an ounce of respect.

I'm neither a tenant or a landlord btw!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree