Call Us TODAY on 020 3588 4240

The 100K Eviction | Reality or Myth

Worth Sharing?

Download Our Free E-book

Get Access to the Best Content on High Court Enforcement

From our heritage as Sheriffs we have developed our property services for the benefit of our community so they have a one-stop shop of protection.

Evictions are a cost that landlords could really do without but this month an article caught our eye in the UK’s Daily Telegraph which we felt was worthy of a blog post. It was headlined as “Fresh Woe for Landlords Facing 100K Bills to Evict Problem Tenants” (see As Shergroup offers a range of property solutions, one of which is an enforcement service to evict tenants, (whether they are a problem or not), we were interested in the alleged cost in this statement.

As our blog readers will know, our CEO, Claire Sandbrook, is a big Daily Telegraph reader. She finds the content to be reliable and evidence based – which is in turn ideal material for a blog. But she found the headline a little startling and dare we say, inflammatory.

There is no doubt that evicting a tenant incurs a significant cost to a landlord, but the squeezing of the eviction procedure is not going to change that. The costs in place in the current system have always been there and will continue to be one of the risks that landlords in all their various guises of complexity have to manage as an overhead of their business model.

We have blogged and commented extensively on one cost that time and time again the Government and Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service have failed to deal with – and that is the delay in getting an eviction date. Worse still, the eviction process, even after the Court has made its order, is unnecessarily complicated. The current system just adds delay and therefore more cost to this already difficult and controversial area of the law.

No one likes eviction – we certainly don’t relish it – and we have to do it. What we have always wanted is a smooth transition from the county court where the possession orders are made, to the High Court where we have the authority to enforce a High Court Writ of Possession. Landlords should be able to choose their eviction process. Some may have social and political considerations for delaying eviction. We understand that. But private landlords, the people the Government is now putting under added pressure by changing the law on Section 21 evictions, may well need the rental income to fund the mortgage for the rented property.

Some may say – well that’s just tough. Really? If a court grants a landlord a possession order, isn’t it right that the Order should be capable of enforcement as soon as the law allows? Judges may want to put in safeguards or put the brakes on an eviction, but any delay should be transparent. Maladministration certainly shouldn’t be a reason for a claimant not to be able to enforce.

Landlords who issue their claim for possession and evict in accordance with the law are doing the right thing. They are a customer of HMCTS and as such they are entitled to a timely and efficient service which includes the enforcement of any eventual order. They should not in our view be put under further pressure because the legal system can’t make up its mind about how to enforce the eventual order.

The fact is the county court system is clogged up with too many evictions, and there are in-built delays in issuing a Form N293A to certify the possession order has been made. Getting the right form of N293A from certain courts can add weeks to the time it takes to instruct a High Court Enforcement office to manage the eviction. Weeks of delay lead to lost rent – one of the costs mentioned in the Daily Telegraph article. This is a cost that could be eliminated from the cost of eviction, if policy makers and judges would only examine the entire process including the delays in courts up and down the country to give an eviction date.

Our own solution to the issue of the cost of evicting tenants is to offer a complete one stop shop – from issuing the relevant Notice all the way through to evicting the tenant – with fixed pricing at the various stages and complete transparency. This offers landlords some certainty and we think reduces the delay of getting our enforcement teams in at the end of the process to carry out the eviction. Yes, it does cost more than a Warrant of Possession, but our eviction timetable is 7-10 from date of instruction, which in turn saves weeks of unpaid rent as a claimant waits for an eviction date. This is the real benefit of the High Court system.

For more information about our complete service call our Business Solutions Team on 0845 890 9200 or chat to us on

You Might Also Like

Content Writer​


The following disclaimer applies to Shergroup Limited and its platform, Please read this notice carefully before accessing or using any information provided on our platform.

  1. No Legal Advice | The information presented on, including but not limited to articles, blog posts, FAQs, and other resources, is provided for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be considered, legal advice. The information provided does not create a solicitor/client relationship between Shergroup Limited and the user.
  2. Not a Substitute for Legal Advice | The information on should not be relied upon as a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified professional. The application of laws and regulations can vary based on specific circumstances, and legal advice tailored to your particular situation is crucial. Therefore, we may refer you to a member of our partner firm -Shergroup Legal – on legal matters or encourage you to take your own legal advice from your preferred advisor.
  3. No Guarantee of Accuracy | While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, Shergroup Limited does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information on The legal landscape is constantly evolving, and laws may vary across jurisdictions. Therefore, any reliance you place on the information provided is at your own risk.
  4. No Liability | Shergroup Limited, including its officers, employees, agents, and affiliates, shall not be held liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages arising out of your access to or use of or any information contained therein. This includes, but is not limited to, any errors or omissions in the content, or any actions taken or not taken based on the information provided.
  5. Third-Party Links | may contain links to third-party websites or resources. These links are provided solely for convenience and do not imply endorsement or responsibility for the content, accuracy, or legality of such websites or resources. Shergroup Limited shall not be liable for any damages or losses incurred as a result of accessing or using any third-party websites or resources.
  6. Changes to Disclaimer | Shergroup Limited reserves the right to modify or amend this disclaimer notice at any time without prior notice. Any changes will be effective immediately upon posting on It is your responsibility to review this notice periodically for updates.

By accessing or using, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agreed to this disclaimer notice. If you do not agree with any part of this notice, you should refrain from accessing or using

Last updated | 19 July 2023

Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this disclaimer notice, please contact us at [email protected]