10:14
Foxgate & Sterling · Hammersmith
  • Foxgate & Sterling · 18-branch West/South-West London letting agency. Established 1992.
  • Your role · Senior Lettings Negotiator, Hammersmith. Reports to Charlotte Eames.
  • Today · Friday 8 May 2026. Day 8 of the post-RRA regime. Section 21 was abolished last week.
  • The trap · Tuesday's all-hands led with Ground 1A. The first instruction today is not a Ground 1A case.
Friday 8 May 2026 · Internal

"Last week we'd have served Section 21. This week we have to think."

Section 8 Possession Notices Housing Act 1988 · RRA 2025
Single module · 45 min
Notice
30
FRI 10:14 · Hammersmith
50
Client
Henrietta Whitmore
Landlord client

"I want the property back. The Hammersmith one. Tomas — my son — he's finishing his postgrad in September and he wants to move in. He's been renting in Camden and the landlord's selling, and I thought, well, I have a flat sitting there with two perfectly nice people in it, but my own son. He's twenty-nine. He needs a home."

"I read about the new law in The Times last weekend. Four months, my solicitor friend said. I want it done by September so Tomas can move in straight from his course. And — look, if Tomas changes his mind, if he gets a graduate job that takes him to Manchester, I might just sell instead. The market's not bad. But the point is I want the flat back. One way or another."

Exhibit 1 · Tomas's letter
From Tomas Whitmore-Reed To Henrietta Whitmore Date 28 April 2026
Hammersmith — yes please

Mum,

Thinking about it more, the Hammersmith flat would be perfect. I finish in September and the Camden lease is up at the end of October either way. If you can get it back I'd love to move in and make it my place properly — would be home for at least a few years.

I know it's complicated with the tenants. Let me know what the agent says.

T x

Notice
30
FRI 10:38 · Meeting room
50
Client

Henrietta has stopped talking. The folder is open on the table. You have read Tomas's letter twice. You need to tell her what ground the agency is going to advise her to use — that conversation will set the entire course of the next four months.

Decision 1 · The brief
What do you tell her?
A · Family occupation
Advise Ground 1
Landlord/family member to occupy. Tomas qualifies. 4 months' notice. Tenancy has run 4 years. Build the evidence and serve.
B · Sale ground
Advise Ground 1A
Henrietta did say she might sell. Same 4-month notice. Headline post-RRA reform. Lock in the sale framing.
C · Rent arrears
Advise Ground 8
The path the agency knows. Push for arrears even though tenants paid every month for four years.
D · ASB
Advise Ground 14
Build a Ground 14 case from any landlord characterisation of the tenants you can elicit. No record of complaints.
Notice
30
FRI 10:46 · Charlotte's desk
50
Client
Outcome · Charlotte signs off
"Ground 1, son moving in. That's right."

Charlotte stops by your desk. "Heard you talking through Hammersmith Court. The trap on this floor this week is going to be Ground 1A — same notice period, headline reform, everyone's been thinking about sale-cases. But this isn't a sale case. Henrietta said she might sell if Tomas changes his mind. The ground attaches to the actual stated intent at moment of service, not the contingency."

"Build the Ground 1 evidence. Tomas's signed statement. Family relationship documented — birth certificates. Henrietta's witness statement. Then we draft. Saskia at HQ wants to sign off on every Section 8 notice in the first six months, so we'll loop her in before you serve."

Ground 1 vs Ground 1A — the load-bearing distinction

Both grounds: 4 months' notice. Both grounds: tenancy must have run 12 months. Ground 1 is for landlord-or-family-occupation; Ground 1A is for sale.

The grounds are not interchangeable. Ground 1A imposes a 12-month no-relet restriction post-notice that Ground 1 does not. Citing Ground 1A on a family-occupation case fabricates an intention the landlord does not have, and exposes the landlord to a £40,000 civil penalty if the property is later let.

Outcome · Charlotte resets the call
"Wait. Ground 1A? Read the brief again."

Charlotte stops by your desk. "She said her son is moving in. She mentioned sale as a contingency — 'if Tomas changes his mind' — but the primary instruction is family occupation. That's Ground 1, not 1A."

"I'd been worried about exactly this trap on the floor this week. Same notice period, the briefing on Tuesday led with 1A because that's the headline reform, and now everyone's pattern-matching the 4-month notice to 1A. But the ground attaches to the stated primary intent. Pick 1A and you've also just told Henrietta she can't re-let for 12 months without a £40,000 penalty if Tomas does end up moving in. Reset. Ground 1. Build the evidence."

Why 1A is the trap, not the answer

Ground 1 and Ground 1A share the 4-month notice and the 12-month tenancy minimum. They are otherwise distinct.

Ground 1A imposes a 12-month no-relet restriction post-notice with civil penalties up to £40,000. Ground 1 does not. Mis-citation in the first weeks of the post-RRA regime is the most-flagged error in ARLA Propertymark's compliance briefings.

Outcome · Charlotte resets the call
"Hold on. There are no arrears."

Charlotte stops by your desk. "Ground 8 is rent arrears. Daniel and Ana have paid every month for four years. There are no arrears. Citing Ground 8 when the rent ledger is clean is an abuse-of-process flag at the tribunal — and a complaint to ARLA waiting to happen."

"The case is Ground 1. Family occupation. Tomas is moving in. Reset and build the Ground 1 evidence."

Citing a ground you cannot prove

Schedule 2 grounds must be made out on the facts. A notice that cites a ground without supporting evidence is struck out at the tribunal's first review. Repeated mis-citation is an ARLA complaint matter.

Outcome · Charlotte resets the call
"Stop. We don't manufacture statutory facts."

Charlotte stops by your desk. "We're not building a Ground 14 case out of nothing. Henrietta hasn't said anything that gets us to anti-social behaviour — there is no complaint record, no police contact, no neighbour report. 'Difficult' is not nuisance. We don't manufacture statutory facts to fit a client's preferred timeline."

"The case is Ground 1. Family occupation. That's the conversation we're having. Reset."

Ground 14 is evidence-led, not preference-led

Ground 14 is discretionary and evidence-led. The court considers tenant cooperation, impact on other occupants, and documented complaints. A landlord's statement that a tenant is 'difficult' is not statutory fact.

Notice
30
FRI 11:14 · Schedule 2
50
Client
Activity 1 · Section 8 Ground Selector

Schedule 2 of the Housing Act 1988 (as amended) · pick the supportable ground.

The Foxgate case-management system shows you the post-RRA Schedule 2 ground panel. Click each ground you wish to cite on the notice. Each ground is tested by the tribunal against the facts in Henrietta's file. Pick the wrong ground and the notice dies at first review; cite multiple grounds and discretionary grounds that cannot be made out drag down the credibility of the whole notice. False-positive penalty applies for each unsupported discretionary ground.

Schedule 2 · Ground pool

Ground 1 · Landlord / family member to occupy Mandatory · 4 months' notice
Ground 1A · Landlord intends to sell Mandatory · 4 months' notice
Ground 2 · Mortgage default on the property Mandatory · 2 months' notice
Ground 6 · Redevelopment Mandatory · 4 months' notice
Ground 7A · Serious offence by tenant Mandatory · 4 weeks' notice
Ground 8 · Rent arrears (3+ months, mandatory) Mandatory · 4 weeks' notice
Ground 12 · Other tenancy breach (discretionary) Discretionary · 2 weeks' notice
Ground 14 · Anti-social behaviour (discretionary) Discretionary · immediate (court discretion)

Cite on the notice

Notice
30
FRI 11:34 · Branch manager review
50
Client
Charlotte Eames
Branch Manager

"Selection's in. Move to the notice."

Notice
30
FRI 11:48 · Henrietta on the phone
50
Client

Henrietta is back on the phone, asking for the timeline. Ground 1 requires 4 months' notice. If you serve by next Friday (15 May), the earliest possession date is mid-September — exactly what she wants. But there are options.

Decision 2 · Notice timing
What do you tell her?
A · Clean timeline
Serve next Friday — 4-month notice
Draft this afternoon. Saskia signs off Monday. Serve 15 May by post and email. Earliest possession 15 September. Tribunal hearing the week after.
B · Soften the blow
Pre-warn Daniel and Ana informally
Drop a courtesy email or door-knock before serving. Slows the clock by a week, creates an evidence trail of pre-notice negotiation James will exploit at tribunal.
C · Procedurally cautious
Wait until Tomas's plans firm up
Tell Henrietta to wait two months for the picture to firm up. Loses the September move-in window. Probably loses the client.
Notice
30
FRI 11:58 · Henrietta hears the answer
50
Client
Outcome · Henrietta exhales
"Next Friday. Right. That works for Tomas. Thank you."

Clean post-RRA timeline. Service next Friday gives 4 months' notice expiring on or around 15 September, period-aligned to the tenancy month. Henrietta keeps her September window. The notice goes through HQ legal sign-off before service. The tribunal hearing slot will be the week after the notice expires — a standard post-RRA listing pattern.

Charlotte DMs you on Teams: "Good call. Saskia has Monday morning blocked for the draft review. Send it over Sunday evening."

The 4-month minimum is a floor, not a target

Ground 1 requires a minimum 4 months' notice. The notice can run longer — there is no maximum — but it cannot run shorter. The effective date must also be aligned to the end of a tenancy period (typically the rental month-end).

Outcome · Henrietta queries the approach
"Why would we tell them before we serve?"

"Wouldn't that just give them time to dig in?" Henrietta is right to push back. A pre-warning is procedurally well-meaning but creates an evidence trail that a tenants' solicitor can use to argue the landlord was uncertain about the ground or hesitant about the case. Section 8 notices are served clean — the prescribed Form 6A warning is itself the statutory notice to the tenant, with signposts to Citizens Advice, Shelter, and the Ombudsman.

Charlotte resets to clean service. The pre-warn idea is dropped before it leaves the branch. Notice Admissibility takes a small hit but the case is recoverable.

Form 6A is the warning

Form 6A contains a prescribed statutory warning to the tenant in plain English with signposts to Citizens Advice, Shelter, and the Housing Ombudsman. That warning is the formal notification.

Outcome · Henrietta walks
"I'm going to need to think about whether Foxgate is the right agency for this."

"Two months? But then we're into mid-July before you even serve — that takes Tomas's move-in to November. He's signed a lease in Camden through October on the assumption the Hammersmith flat will be ready."

Charlotte intervenes via DM and offers the next-Friday timeline. The notice will still be drafted and served, but the client relationship is damaged. Foxgate may lose the eventual sale phase to a competitor.

Cautious is not the same as careful

Statutory caution is the law's job; procedural caution beyond the law is a commercial choice. A Ground 1 case that meets the evidential threshold today does not become stronger by waiting two months — and the client may not wait.

Notice
30
FRI 14:22 · Form 6A draft
50
Client
Activity 2 · Notice Composer (Form 6A)

Five parameters. Each has one right answer.

Saskia Mendel · HQ Property Law · Teams DM

Standard Section 8 review. The 1A trap is what I'm watching for everywhere this month — confirm Ground 1 cited as primary, particulars name the family member and the family relationship, and the warning is in the prescribed form not your own words. Send the draft for sign-off when you're done. SM.

You have selected Ground 1. The Notice Composer asks you to fix five parameters that together make the Form 6A notice tribunal-admissible. Each parameter has three or four options. Get all five correct and the notice is clean. One error = technically defective (notice survives initial review but dies on tenant challenge at tribunal). Two or more errors = grossly defective (notice dies at tribunal's first review, possession refused regardless of evidence bundle quality).

Parameter 1 · Ground citation
Ground 1 (Schedule 2, Housing Act 1988 as amended by the Renters' Rights Act 2025)
Ground 1A (Schedule 2, Housing Act 1988 as amended by the Renters' Rights Act 2025)
Ground 1 (in shorthand, no statutory reference)
Various Section 8 grounds (to keep options open)
Parameter 2 · Notice period
4 months from date of service
2 months from date of service
14 days from date of service
Parameter 3 · Particulars of the claim
"The landlord's son, Tomas Whitmore-Reed (proof of family relationship enclosed), intends to occupy 12 Hammersmith Court as his only or principal home from 15 September 2026, evidenced by the signed letter of 28 April 2026 enclosed at Exhibit 2."
"The landlord requires the property for a family member."
"The landlord intends to sell the property."
Leave the particulars section blank — the ground citation is enough.
Parameter 4 · Service method
First-class signed-for post + email + proof-of-service certificate completed by the process server
Hand-delivered by the agent at the door, no proof of service
Posted second-class, no signed-for, no proof
Parameter 5 · Signature block + prescribed warning
Landlord-signed (Henrietta) with date + agent counter-sign + the prescribed statutory warning in plain English with signposts to Citizens Advice / Shelter / Housing Ombudsman
Agent-only signature + Foxgate's own template warning text — "You should seek legal advice if you wish to contest this notice."
Pre-printed signature, no warning
Admissibility Select an option in each of the five rows to evaluate admissibility.
Notice
30
FRI 15 MAY · 18:42 · 12 Hammersmith Court
50
Client
James Whitehead
Housing-aid solicitor

The process server rang the ground-floor bell at 18:42. Daniel opened the door — just home from work, still in his jacket, Ana in the hallway behind him with a takeaway bag. Daniel signed the proof-of-service certificate. He read the front page on the doorstep. Ana asked what it was. He said: "It's a Section 8."

By Sunday afternoon Daniel had emailed three legal-aid solicitors. By Monday morning James Whitehead had rung him back and offered a same-day consultation. By Wednesday, James filed for a copy of the notice, the original tenancy agreement, the rent ledger, and any agency communications relating to the instruction.

"I've read the notice three times. I want to know two things before we file the response. One — do the particulars name the family member, evidence the family relationship, and assert principal-home occupation. Two — is the prescribed warning in the form the regulations require, or did the agency write it themselves. If both are clean, the case will turn on the evidence bundle. If either is sloppy, we have a procedural defence."

Notice
30
TUE 1 SEPT · 14:14 · Filing deadline 16:00
50
Client
Activity 3 · Tribunal Evidence Bundle

Twelve documents. Four bundles. Filing deadline 16:00.

Four months later. The notice expired yesterday. Hearing Thursday at the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber. File each evidence item in its correct bundle, or mark as NOT FILED if it is not relevant to a Ground 1 case. Asymmetric scoring: missing a critical item is the load-bearing failure mode (notice deemed not properly served, OR Ground 1 not made out). Wrong-bundle critical = judge's annoyance. Over-bundling decoy = process penalty.

Bundle 1
Notice + Service Proof
Bundle 2
Ground 1 Supporting Evidence
Bundle 3
Tenancy History
Bundle 4
Witness Statements
Filed: 0 of 12 evidence items.
Notice
30
THU 4 SEPT · 10:00 · First-tier Tribunal
50
Client
Case Note
Tribunal day

Hearing Room 3, ground floor of the Hammersmith County Court Building. The bench is up by three steps; the witness box is to the bench's left; the public gallery has six chairs and two are taken by ARLA Propertymark observers — the post-RRA tribunal listings have become a regional learning resource.

Henrietta sits at the applicants' table next to you. Daniel sits at the respondents' table next to James Whitehead. Ana is in the public gallery; she has a paperback in her lap she has not opened. Judge Hoult takes the bench at 10:03 and asks for the bundle. The clerk hands up four lever-arch files in order.

The judge spends seven minutes reading the notice, the service proof, and Tomas's intent letter. She does not look up. James is making notes on a yellow legal pad. Daniel is staring at the carpet between his feet. At 10:11 the judge looks up.

Notice
50
THU 4 SEPT · 11:18 · Operative ruling
50
Client
Day 122 · 11:18

Possession granted in 14 days.

Ending
Clean Win
Score ·

"James opened with two procedural challenges and ran through the genuine-intention test. Both failed in your favour. By 11:18 Judge Hoult had read the operative ruling. Each side bears its own costs."

What made this work

  • Section 21 is gone. Under the post-RRA regime the letting agent's first job is picking the correct Section 8 ground and drafting a Form 6A notice that survives tribunal review.
  • Ground 1 (family occupation) and Ground 1A (sale) share the 4-month notice and the 12-month tenancy floor but are otherwise distinct. Ground 1A imposes a 12-month no-relet criminal restriction that Ground 1 does not. Mis-citation is the most common Section 8 error in the first weeks of the new regime.
  • Particulars are mandatory and load-bearing. "The landlord requires the property for a family member" is too vague; the particulars must name the family member, evidence the relationship, and assert principal-home occupation.
  • The evidence bundle is the second admissibility check. Missing the service-proof or the Ground 1 genuine-intention evidence will refuse the case even if the notice itself is clean.

Four months later

Henrietta
Property back. Tomas moved in 18 September and is occupying as his only or principal home. Retains Foxgate for the eventual sale of one of her other BTL properties.
Daniel & Ana
Left on 18 September with 4 months' notice that gave them time to find a new home. Ana is days from due date.
Foxgate & Sterling
Clean possession. Retained client. Charlotte uses the case in the Foxgate post-RRA training pack as a reference walkthrough.
Tomas
Moved in 18 September. Compliance preserved.
Why this matters

Procedural craft is the protection. Daniel and Ana lost a home they liked, but the procedure ensured they had four months' notice, the right to seek advice, the right to contest, and the right to be heard. The agency's job is to operate that procedure correctly — not to soften it for the client or sharpen it against the tenant.

Replay module
Notice
40
THU 4 SEPT · 11:54 · Operative ruling
40
Client
Day 122 · 11:54

Possession granted — with costs against the agency.

Ending
With Concerns
Score ·

"The notice survives the procedural challenges, but the bundle has gaps and the particulars have soft edges that James spent the morning probing. Possession ordered, costs against the agency."

What this teaches

  • A notice that is admissible on its face can still attract a costs order if the surrounding bundle has gaps. The tribunal reads the notice and the file.
  • Procedural sloppiness — vague particulars, missing decoy evidence over-filed, soft service-proof — does not always kill a case but it always costs the firm.
  • The Ground 1 evidence test is genuine intention. The minimum the tribunal looks for: signed letter from the named occupant, family-relationship proof, landlord's witness statement. Absent any one of these, the case weakens by a step.

Four months later

Henrietta
Possession granted but with a costs order against Foxgate. Tomas still moves in. Keeps Foxgate but the branch fee has been shaved.
Daniel & Ana
Leave on 18 September. The agency carries a costs award. Their personal loss is the same as in the clean ending.
Foxgate & Sterling
Retained client. Costs award shaves the case fee. Charlotte schedules remedial training. The case is in the training pack as a learning case.
Tomas
Moved in 18 September.
Replay module
Notice
15
THU 4 SEPT · 12:30 · Operative ruling
25
Client
Day 122 · 12:30

Possession refused. Costs against the landlord.

Ending
Refused
Score ·

"James opened with the procedural challenges and the case did not survive them. Wrong ground, defective particulars, missing service proof, or missing Ground 1 genuine-intention evidence — any one was enough at first review."

What this teaches

  • The notice is the single document the tribunal reads first and reads most carefully. Wrong ground, wrong notice period, defective particulars, missing prescribed warning — any one kills the notice at first review.
  • Under the pre-RRA Section 21 regime a letting agent could draft a notice in twenty minutes. Under the post-RRA Section 8 regime that is no longer the time-budget. The professional work moved from the courtroom to the desk.
  • The Ground 1A trap is the most expensive mistake on a family-occupation case. Same notice period, completely different evidential demands, locks the landlord into a 12-month no-relet criminal restriction with civil penalty up to £40,000.

Four months later

Henrietta
Costs against her. Has to start over with a fresh notice — another 4 months. Moves to a competitor agency. September move-in gone.
Daniel & Ana
Remain in the property. James files a counter-claim for damages. They have a stronger position the next time a notice is served.
Foxgate & Sterling
Case dismissed. Client lost. James publishes (anonymised) on his housing-law blog. Charlotte runs a full team review.
Tomas
Move-in pushed back at least 8 months. By the time the second notice expires he may have signed a different lease elsewhere.
Replay module