Think tank

The nature of the issue presented asks some questions about the nature of your support and referral processes – you may need to review them. Sticking to the legal issues, a landlord only needs to give two months' notice in writing on an assured shorthold tenancy (there is no statutory format to this). Legal proceedings can only begin after any fixed term has ended and the notice expired. As the ground is mandatory, this cannot be challenged. This is the legal position, but RSLs are expected to comply with the Housing Corporation code of practice on tenure. This states that RSLs should supply alternative accommodation or use their best endeavours to prevent residents becoming homeless when an assured shorthold tenancy ends (unless the tenancy has been breached). The code of practice also states that where an assured shorthold tenancy has been breached, the policy to decide whether to take possession should "normally" be the same as that used for assured tenants. This does not preclude the use of the mandatory ground, but I would suggest that the RSL needs to be able to demonstrate that the action is reasonable, proportionate to the breach and has been through the appropriate internal controls at the RSL.
Mark Austin, Operations manager, London & Quadrant

Legally, because he is an assured shorthold tenant you can probably evict him without having to show good reason, provided you serve proper notice. (I say "probably" because some lawyers think he has a defence, but it involves a controversial interpretation of the Human Rights Act.) But, even assuming there is no legal obstacle, I would suggest there are serious issues in terms of good practice when evicting a tenant where, as you acknowledge, you have no proof of wrongdoing. You should also have regard to the fact that his serious health and mobility problems mean he is unlikely to find suitable housing except in the social sector. I have to say I would be loath to evict such a tenant without very good evidence of serious misconduct – and even then I should want to try to find him some alternative that would meet his housing needs and allow him to address the drug use.
John Bryant, Policy officer, National Housing Federation

Ill communication
I am a long-established tenant in a secure tenancy. In January 2002 I became worried my landlord was assessing my rent charge incorrectly and charging for central heating, a facility that I do not have. This was confirmed in a letter from my landlord in March, after lengthy correspondence by me to my landlord on the matter. Since January I have repeatedly requested clarification of the matter in recorded correspondence and asked for copies of my landlord's rent assessment calculations on my tenancy since 1 April 2000, when I believe this charge was introduced. I have received a small reimbursement from my landlord, which I believe is incorrect, and my rent has remained the same sum, even though I was informed in writing in March that it would be readjusted. All my requests for written details of my rent assessment calculations to my landlord to date have not been acknowledged. Is my landlord entitled to withhold this information from me?

If you are paying a fair rent, this is a matter for the rent officer rather than the landlord. But I get the impression from your question that although you are a secure tenant, either no fair rent has been determined in your case or the landlord has chosen to levy a lesser rent than that determined by the rent officer. If this assumption is correct, your rent ought to be governed by your landlord's rent-setting policy. The landlord should make this available to you and explain how it has been applied in your case. If the landlord has failed to supply this information, or to abide by an undertaking to reduce your rent, or to reply to letters, you may want to invoke its complaints procedure. If, after doing so, you are still dissatisfied you can go to the independent housing ombudsman.
John Bryant, Policy officer, National Housing Federation