Abandonment

If a property appears to have been abandoned, the safest course is usually not to take it back yourself. In most cases, the landlord should get a possession order before re-entering. If you get that call wrong, you may face an allegation of unlawful eviction, with the risk of prosecution, a civil claim for damages, or both.

A tenant does not lose a tenancy just because they stop staying at the property or stop paying rent. The basic point is this:

if the tenancy has not been lawfully ended, the tenant will usually still be entitled to possession; and
if the landlord goes back in without a court order, there is a real risk of unlawful eviction.

That is what makes abandonment cases difficult. Things may look obvious on the ground, but still be disputed later.

Why abandonment is risky

Section 2 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 generally requires a court order before a landlord can recover possession. There is a limited defence under section 1(2) where the landlord believed, and had reasonable cause to believe, that the occupier had stopped living there. In practice, that defence can be hard to prove, so it should be approached with caution.

The protection does not apply only to the tenant. It can also extend to other people lawfully living at the property. For example, if the tenant has allowed someone else to stay there, that person may still have statutory protection even if the arrangement breaches the tenancy agreement.

The tenancy does not simply disappear

If the tenant has moved out and the property is no longer their only or principal home, that does not automatically end the tenancy. In an assured periodic tenancy, the tenancy may cease to be assured, but it will usually continue as a contractual tenancy until it is properly ended.

So even where the property looks empty, the tenant may still have the legal right to occupy it and keep others out. That is why a court order remains the safest route.

The real question: does the tenant intend to return?

When landlords talk about abandonment, the wrong question is often:

“Is anybody living here?”

The better question is:

“Has the tenant actually given up the property, or do they intend to return within a reasonable time?”

That matters because there are plenty of situations where a property may look abandoned when it is not. A tenant may be:

in hospital;
in prison;
stranded abroad;
staying temporarily with family or friends; or
away for some other reason while still planning to come back.

In those cases, there may be no obvious sign of occupation and the rent may have stopped, but the tenancy may still be continuing.

What evidence may help?

Rent arrears, on their own, are usually not enough to establish abandonment. Tenants stop paying rent for all sorts of reasons. If a landlord is trying to determine whether the tenant has genuinely gone, they will usually need broader evidence showing that the tenant’s conduct is inconsistent with the tenancy continuing.

That might include:

the tenant telling the council they have moved out;
closing meter readings given to utility suppliers;
removal of most or all personal belongings;
neighbours confirming that the tenant has left;
returned mail or failed attempts at contact;
messages or emails suggesting that the tenant has moved elsewhere; and
other evidence showing that the tenant has set up home at another address.

Even then, there is still risk. Evidence of abandonment may help explain the landlord’s decision, but it does not guarantee that retaking possession without a court order will be safe.

Abandonment notices

Landlords sometimes put a notice on the door saying that they believe the property has been abandoned and will take possession if the tenant does not respond. These are often called “abandonment notices”.

A notice like that may help as one piece of evidence, but it is not a formal legal process, and it is not enough on its own. A tenant who is in hospital, in custody, or otherwise unable to return may never see it. For that reason, an abandonment notice should never be treated as a substitute for a possession order.

There is no general abandonment procedure in force in England that allows a landlord to end a tenancy simply by serving a notice and waiting.

Involve the local authority if appropriate

Where the facts are unusual, and the landlord genuinely believes the property has been abandoned, it may be sensible to discuss the position with the local authority and explain the evidence. Many unlawful eviction prosecutions start with local authority involvement.

That does not make an unsafe course safe, but if the council understands the facts and does not object to the landlord’s proposed approach, it may reduce the risk of enforcement action. It is still not as safe as getting a court order.

Recommended approach

Landlords should usually:

try to contact the tenant by every reasonable method;
contact any guarantor, next of kin, emergency contact, or other known contact;
gather evidence carefully;
inspect the property lawfully and keep a written record;
take photographs where appropriate;
keep copies of all messages, letters, emails, and notes of phone calls; and
if there is any real doubt, issue possession proceedings and obtain a court order.

If the situation is urgent or high-risk, legal advice should be taken before any step is taken to recover possession.

Goods left behind

If the landlord recovers possession and the tenant has left belongings behind, those goods still need to be properly dealt with. You should not assume they can simply be thrown away.

Once goods are left at the property, the landlord will usually become a bailee. That means taking reasonable care of the goods and taking reasonable steps to return them. The relevant law is the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977.

What should landlords do with goods?

The landlord should usually:

make an inventory of what has been left;
take photographs;
keep the items reasonably safe;
contact the tenant using any known contact details;
give a clear written deadline for collection; and
explain what will happen if the goods are not collected.

The tenancy agreement should ideally include a fair clause addressing goods left behind. Any such clause must comply with the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

If the tenant cannot be traced, reasonable steps should be taken to find them. That might include checking the tenancy application, contacting the guarantor, next of kin, or employer, and using any forwarding details already held.

Can goods be moved or sold?

Goods can usually be moved if that is done carefully and without causing damage. The question is whether the landlord has acted reasonably. In Jones v Gospel [1998], the court accepted that moving goods was not necessarily wrongful, provided reasonable care was taken.

Selling or disposing of goods is more sensitive. Before that happens, the landlord should usually give proper notice and allow a reasonable opportunity for collection. What is reasonable will depend on the facts, including the nature and value of the goods.

Higher-value items, especially vehicles, should be treated with particular care. If a vehicle has been left behind, extra steps should be taken to trace the owner. In some cases, the DVLA may assist.

Final point

There may be rare cases where a landlord can safely conclude that a property has been abandoned and act without a court order. But those cases are the exception. In most situations, the safer course is to obtain a possession order first.

If in doubt, do not rely on abandonment alone.

Last Reviewed: