Home // Insights & Events // What are the potential consequences of committing an illegal eviction?
The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) recently handed down a judgment in proceedings involving criminal offences under section 1(2) and 1(3A) of the Protection From Eviction Act 1977 (the ‘Act’) in the case of Wu v Chelmsford City Council [2023] EWCA Crim 338. It is a reminder to property guardian providers of the potential consequences of committing an illegal eviction, even if such an act was unintentional.
Section 1(2) of the Act states: “It is an offence for a person unlawfully to deprive a residential occupier of his accommodation.”
Section 1(3A) of the Act states: “A landlord (or an agent) commits an offence if they persistently withdraw or withhold services reasonably required for the occupation of the premises as a residence.”
This case involved a landlord of a property she rented to a family. She served notice seeking possession but did not issue a claim. In June 2018, she instructed builders to change the locks and disconnect the water supply. The tenants contacted the local authority (Chelmsford City Council) who contacted the landlord requiring her to provide new keys to the tenant, otherwise she would be committing an offence under the Act. After some delay, the landlord provided a replacement set of keys to the tenants.
The local authority prosecuted the landlord alleging breaches of the Act for the changing of the locks (under section 1(2)) and the disconnection of the water supply (under section 1(3A)). In her defence, the landlord argued she had forgotten to provide replacement keys. She was found guilty by the jury.
The landlord appealed her verdict to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).
The Court of Appeal dismissed the landlord’s appeal. It held that once the landlord had acted in a way which put or kept the occupier out of physical possession (in this case failing to provide a copy of the replacement keys) an offence was committed under section 1(2) of the Act.
The landlord also sought to defend the alleged breach of section 1(3A) asserting an offence either required more than one act (i.e. not the single act of turning off the water supply) and/or could not be an omission (i.e. not reinstating it). The judges also rejected these arguments and therefore held a single act, or an omission can attract criminal liability.
This decision is a further important reminder for property guardian providers about the risks associated with carrying out an act or omission that may be construed as an illegal eviction and/or harassment to the property guardians. Examples of illegal evictions include:
All landlords, licensors and letting agents must follow the correct procedures to evict tenants/licensees pursuant to the Act. We previously wrote about Camden Council’s novel and stringent approach in seeking an injunction against a landlord seeking to illegally evict and harass its tenants.
Our highly experienced Property Guardianship team can help you understand your obligations when it comes to the Act to prevent potential criminal liability and risk to your reputation. Please do get in touch.
Related articles
This update is for general purposes and guidance only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. You should seek legal advice before relying on its content. Greenwoods Legal LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership, registered in England, registered number OC306912. Our registered office is Queens House, 55-56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3LJ. A list of the members’ names is available for inspection at our offices in Peterborough, Cambridge and London. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, SRA number 401162. Details of the Solicitors’ Codes of Conduct can be found at www.sra.org.uk. All instructions accepted by Greenwoods Legal LLP are subject to our current Terms of Business. VAT Reg No: 161 9287 89.
Get in touch with us (*Required fields)
Sign up to updates (*Required fields)