How did a Tory promise to end no-fault evictions become stalled?

Reforms to help renters are being watered down or delayed in the Commons, where many MPs are themselves landlords, says Mary Dejevsky

The Renters (Reform) Bill is on its third reading (PA)

Conservatives pledged in the 2019 manifesto to abolish Section 21 notices, which allow landlords to evict tenants without giving a reason. No-fault eviction, as it is called, has been one of the biggest complaints of tenants, and the abolition of Section 21 notices has long been a central demand of tenant and homelessness campaign groups, such as Shelter.

Now, almost five years after the first promise was given, and almost a year since the Renters (Reform) Bill was tabled, the commitment seems no closer to being honoured. The bill is now going through its report stage and third reading in the Commons before returning to the House of Lords, but the key sections are expected to be watered down or subject to delay.

Michael Gove, the housing secretary, also seems to be wavering. In a television interview in February, he insisted Section 21 orders would be abolished by the next election. On the eve of the bill’s third reading, he seemed less certain, saying to the BBC: “Everything depends on the House of Lords. My determination is to ensure that we get this bill on the statute book. But it’s up to the Lords to decide the rate of progress that we can make ... It will be a judgement of the Lords as to how this bill progresses.”

What is a Section 21 notice and why are they so hated?

Section 21 notices, commonly known as no-fault eviction notices, allow a landlord to give tenants two months’ notice to leave rented accommodation at any time in the tenure, crucially, without giving a reason. Tenants say that landlords may use them to evict tenants in response to a request for repairs or a complaint about conditions, or to move in new tenants at a higher rent.

Tenants also say the notices leave them with a permanent sense of insecurity as they never know when they may be required to leave. Research by YouGov, commissioned by Shelter, found that 943,000 tenants have been served Section 21 notices since April 2019, and that almost 85,000 of these households were put at risk of homelessness as a result.

Why has it been so difficult to outlaw them?

Landlords say they need the flexibility to end tenancies, whether for non-payment of rent, anti-social behaviour or simply because they want their property back, whether to realise their asset or to accommodate family or friends. They also warn that landlords would be more reluctant to let their accommodation without Section 21 orders, and that supply would be reduced and rents would rise as a consequence.

Tenants’ organisations and charities blame the government for stalling on the legislation because of opposition from private landlords. It would appear that there are 50 or so Conservative backbenchers who may be landlords themselves (as a surprising number of MPs are) or have been persuaded by landlords’ advocates that abolishing Section 21s would damage their interests.

Michael Gove’s latest interview suggests that he is angling to make the Lords a scapegoat for what is a problem with some of his party’s backbench MPs.

What is the likely outcome?

If the Renters (Reform) Bill eventually passes – which is by no means certain – it is likely that amendments will leave the timetable for abolishing Section 21 orders open, until such time as court procedures are judged satisfactory (though by whom is unclear) to give landlords what they would regard as timely access to their property. An umbrella organisation for tenants’ groups, the Rental Reform Coalition, argues that this could mean no-fault eviction orders are never abolished.

Labour housing spokesman, Michael Pennycook, has said the abolition of Section 21s shouldn’t “be made dependent on unspecified future court improvements” and pledged that a Labour government would “finish the job”.

Would the Renters’ (Reform) Bill be worth anything if it does not end Section 21s?

For all the focus on no-fault evictions, there are some provisions in the bill for both sides. They include requiring the Decent Homes Standard to be applied to the private rented sector for the first time; making it illegal for landlords to reject benefits recipients, and making it easier for councils to sanction criminal landlords. There is also the right for tenants to ask to keep a pet (with the default position being that it is allowed), and the appointment of an ombudsman to rule in tenant-landlord disputes. There are also provisions to make it easier for landlords to evict tenants in breach of their contract, for non-payment of rent, damage or anti-social behaviour.

Is the UK rental market unusual?

Renting in England and Wales is a far less secure proposition than in much of continental Europe and even the United States. One contributory factor is that, thanks to buy-to-let, a relatively large part of rented housing is provided by small private landlords. This has many implications, from how landlords treat their property – as another private home, rather than as a professionally managed commercial operation – to the fact that they may have more personal dealings with their tenants, or might need to quickly realise their asset.

There is also the difference that, in much of continental Europe, there is far less social distinction between renting and buying than there is in the UK, where buying is widely seen as by far the preferred option, hence the preoccupation with “getting on the ladder”.

How might renting be done better?

In much of the industrialised world, the rental sector is dominated by companies whose interest is in having stable, long-term tenants. Tenancies are commonly for a minimum of three years, with strict conditions relating to the period of notice, and with tenants generally having more freedom than landlords to end or extend their lease. Big professional landlords have an interest in reliable tenants staying as long as possible. The relative stability of rents, and conditions attached to when and by how much rents can be raised, limits the attraction of evicting a tenant ahead of time.