In this column, I want to take a look at Grounds 12, 13, and 15. Ground 12 can be used when a tenant breaches their tenancy, and 13 and 15 are used when the tenant has allowed the property (or any common areas) and the landlord-provided furniture to deteriorate.
The important thing to remember is that these three are all discretionary grounds, meaning it is within the presiding judge's discretion whether the landlord will be granted possession.
Let’s get started.
“If your tenant has broken one or more terms in the tenancy agreement that is not related to paying rent, you can try and evict them using this ground.” - Grounds for possession: guidance for landlords and letting agents, Gov.uk
Ground 12 is probably the broadest of the three.
This ground covers breaches of the tenancy agreement. At first glance, this may seem like it should be a mandatory (automatic repossession if proved) ground rather than a discretionary one.
After all, if a tenant has breached their agreement, why shouldn’t the landlord simply get their property back?
The answer is that not every breach is serious enough to justify an eviction.
Tenancies are constantly breached in minor ways. For example, they might keep a small pet without prior consent or make a small alteration to the property that causes little to no damage (cosmetic or otherwise).
It’s very possible to breach the terms of an agreement in a technical sense without any real-world effect.
It would be disproportionate to treat every minor breach as a ground for possession.
For the court to justify the eviction, the breach needs to be sufficiently serious.
There isn’t a single list compiling all the breaches that could fall under the purview of Ground 12.
Depending on the terms of the agreement, the ground could cover any number of things.
One obvious example that we’ve already touched on is pets. If the tenant simply ignores the requirement for getting the landlord’s consent under the Renters’ Rights Act, Ground 12 may be relevant. But the circumstances will matter. A court isn't necessarily going to evict someone because they have a goldfish.
At the other end of the scale, you might have a tenant repeatedly using the property for short-term lets or Airbnb when they aren't permitted to do so.
Unlawful subletting, short letting, overcrowding, or allowing people to occupy the property in circumstances prohibited by the tenancy agreement can all potentially create much more serious issues.
And there's a useful practical lesson here for agents.
The behaviour needs to be considered in the context of the tenancy agreement.
Don't simply assume that something is a breach because it looks undesirable. Check what the agreement actually says.
This is perhaps the most important practical point about Ground 12.
If the landlord wants to regain possession of their property, they need to prove that breaches have occurred and that they're significant enough to justify eviction.
That means they need evidence.
If the alleged breach is unlawful short letting, there may be adverts on short-let platforms. If it's overcrowding, there may be reports from the neighbours or evidence from inspections. If it's damage, there may be photographs and inspection records.
But letting agents need to be careful about how they gather that evidence.
There is no justification for turning a property into a surveillance operation. Installing hidden cameras inside a tenant's home is not an acceptable substitute for proper property management, and agents also need to consider their obligations around data protection and CCTV.
Routine management inspections, properly conducted by the agent, are one of the best ways to gather evidence. So can reports from neighbours or other evidence available from public sources.
The key is to build a proper evidential picture rather than simply turning up in court and saying, "I know they're doing it."
“You can try and evict your tenant if they have allowed the condition of the property to get worse.” - Ground 13, Grounds for possession: guidance for landlords and letting agents, Gov.uk
“You can try and evict your tenant if they have allowed the condition of the furniture to get worse.” - Ground 15, Grounds for possession: guidance for landlords and letting agents, Gov.uk
Grounds 13 and 15 are more specific.
Broadly speaking, they cover situations where the property and landlord-provided furniture have deteriorated to an unfit condition as a result of misuse by the tenant.
It’s important to note that these grounds aren’t applicable to the normal wear and tear that comes from the day-to-day lives of their tenants. Paint gets scuffed. Carpets wear. Furniture gets marked. That's part of letting a property.
The court is looking for something considerably more serious, like long-term, significant damage.
A nail in the wall to hang a picture isn’t going to justify possession. But start cutting large holes in the wall to run television cables, seriously damaging doors, punching holes in the walls or abusing common areas, and the consequences become a lot more actionable.
The same principle applies to furniture.
A little wear and tear on a landlord's dining table won't be enough. A dog trying to find a lost toy by digging down through the sofa, for example, is a very different matter.
And there's an obvious point that sometimes gets missed: Ground 15 concerns landlord-provided furniture. If a tenant destroys their own sofa, that's generally their problem.
One of the slightly counterintuitive features of these grounds is the short notice period of only two weeks for all three grounds.
Given that we're talking about potentially serious breaches or deterioration, that may initially seem surprising.
But because these are discretionary grounds, the court has considerable flexibility when deciding what happens next. It can suspend or delay a possession order in appropriate circumstances.
That means a tenant could potentially be saying to the court: "I accept there was a problem. I've fixed it. Here's my plan to make sure it doesn't happen again."
That's a much stronger position than simply ignoring the landlord.
And it highlights why the letting agent’s approach before issuing proceedings matters.
I think this is going to be one of the biggest practical lessons of the new regime.
If you discover a breach, don't simply wait until possession proceedings become necessary.
Raise it with the landlord, explain the problem, and give the tenant an opportunity to resolve it.
Keep records of those communications. And if the tenant promises to put things right, monitor whether they actually do.
This isn't about being soft on breaches. Quite the opposite.
If the landlord ultimately ends up in court, evidence that the letting agent identified the problem, engaged with the tenant, and gave them an opportunity to resolve it can be extremely valuable.
Conversely, if the tenant repeatedly promises to comply and then continues to do exactly the same thing, that helps demonstrate that the problem isn't simply a one-off mistake.
Grounds 12, 13, and 15 demonstrate a fundamental aspect of the new possession regime.
Possession isn't simply about proving that something went wrong. It's about proving that what went wrong is serious enough to justify ending someone's tenancy.
For landlords, that means evidence will matter much more.
So will record-keeping.
So will communication.
And, perhaps most importantly, so will the steps taken before a Section 8 notice is served.
A two-week notice period doesn't mean letting agents should wait until the last minute to address a problem. In many cases, the real groundwork for a possession claim should already have been done by the time the notice is served.
And if the tenant ignores your efforts, or repeatedly breaks promises to comply, the landlord is in a much stronger position.
The new system may have made possession more complicated, but it has also made good property management more important than ever.