- within Real Estate and Construction topic(s)
- in United States
- within Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring, Transport and Technology topic(s)
A secure tenant has received £115,000 in compensation after Harrow Council unlawfully ended his tenancy and re-let his home, following a defective Notice to Quit served by his former partner. The settlement was reached after legal action brought by Duncan Lewis Solicitors in the High Court (King's Bench Division) in the case Nagar v London Borough of Harrow.
Background to the Case
Mr Nagar, a long-term secure tenant of Harrow Council, had lived in the property for many years and intended to resume occupation following a family court order. But in December 2023 he discovered the Council had re-let his home without warning, leaving him homeless and without access to his possessions.
The Defective Notice to Quit
The Council claimed the tenancy had been lawfully terminated by a Notice to Quit signed by his ex-wife. However, the Notice, dated 17 October 2023, purported to end the tenancy just six days later, on 23 October 2023. This was in clear breach of both the tenancy agreement and section 5 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977, which requires a minimum of four weeks' notice.
Legal Challenge
Acting for the tenant, Manjinder Kaur Atwal (Solicitor, Housing) and Lewis Zheng Ho (Trainee Solicitor) of Duncan Lewis Solicitors challenged the validity of the Notice and issued High Court proceedings valued at £140,000. Sarah Steinhardt of Doughty Street Chambers acted as counsel.
The Council's Defence and Settlement
Despite Harrow Council's attempts to defend the claim by arguing the Notice was "effective from" a later date, this was unsustainable in law. The statutory notice period begins on the date of service and it cannot be overridden by later interpretation.
Following mediation, Harrow Council agreed to settle the claim for £115,000, recognising the seriousness of the unlawful eviction and the strength of the tenant's legal position.
Manjinder Kaur Atwal, Director of Housing Law at Duncan Lewis, said: "This case is a stark reminder that the four-week notice period is not optional. When councils or landlords fail to follow statutory protections, the consequences for tenants can be devastating and costly for those responsible. We are pleased that Mr Nagar has finally received justice and significant compensation for the hardship he was put through."
Why This Case Matters
This case underscores the critical importance of properly scrutinising Notices to Quit, particularly in joint tenancy situations. Even a seemingly small error, such as failing to meet the four-week statutory notice requirement, can render a Notice completely invalid and expose landlords to high-value unlawful eviction claims.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
