Section 21 vs Section 8 — Historical Comparison | TAS

What changed under the Renters’ Rights Act 2025

Section 21 abolished. Fixed-term assured tenancies abolished. Ground 8 threshold raised to 3 months. Information Sheet required for every tenancy by 31 May 2026. Read the full guide.

Section 21 and Section 8 were the two routes by which landlords recovered possession of an AST until 30 April 2026. Section 21 has been abolished. This page sets out how the two notices compared, why landlords chose between them, and what now replaces the dual-route system.

Why this question still matters

Until 30 April 2026 a private landlord seeking possession had a real choice: Section 21 (the no-reason route, fast and procedural) or Section 8 (the grounds-based route, slower and evidential). Choosing between them was one of the most consequential decisions in any possession scenario.

From 1 May 2026 the choice is gone — Section 21 has been abolished. But the question still matters in two situations:

Landlords with a Section 21 notice already served before 1 May 2026 are still operating under the transitional rules and need to understand both routes.
Landlords reading older guidance, contracts, or letting-agent advice referring to the dual-route system need to understand what changed.

How they compared (pre-1 May 2026)

Section 21 — the no-reason route

No statutory grounds required.
No reason given to the tenant or court.
Two months’ notice (the standard period).
Accelerated procedure available — typically no court hearing.
Procedural prerequisites: deposit protection, prescribed information served on time, How to Rent guide, gas safety record, EPC, EICR, no improvement notice in the last 6 months, no selective licensing breach.
Could not be used in the first four months of an AST.

Section 8 — the grounds-based route

One or more statutory grounds required, supported by evidence.
Reason given on the notice and at hearing.
Variable notice period — 2 weeks to 2 months depending on grounds.
Court hearing required (no accelerated equivalent).
Procedural prerequisites focused on the specific ground (not the same long checklist as Section 21).
Could be used at any point in the tenancy if grounds were made out.

When landlords typically chose each

Section 21 was preferred when:

The landlord simply wanted vacant possession at the end of a fixed term.
There were no specific grounds (the tenant was paying and behaving, but the landlord wanted the property back).
A clean, fast result was the priority.
The landlord was confident in their procedural compliance.

Section 8 was preferred when:

The tenant had serious rent arrears (Ground 8 mandatory route).
Anti-social behaviour or breach issues required formal grounds.
The procedural prerequisites for Section 21 had not been met (e.g. late deposit protection).
The landlord wanted to recover arrears as well as possession.

What replaced this choice

From 1 May 2026, every landlord-initiated possession runs through Section 8. The expanded list of 37 grounds includes new mandatory grounds (Ground 1A for sale, expanded Ground 1 for family, Ground 4A for student HMOs) intended to cover most legitimate landlord-side reasons for needing possession.

In practice, this means:

Wanting possession at the end of a fixed term — there are no fixed terms. Use Ground 1 (family), 1A (sale), or 6 (redevelopment) if applicable. Otherwise the tenancy continues.
Wanting to sell with vacant possession — Ground 1A. Note the 12-month protected period (cannot use in first 12 months) and the 12-month re-let restriction.
Wanting to move family in — Ground 1. Note the 12-month protected period.
Tenant in arrears — Grounds 8, 10, 11.
Anti-social behaviour — Ground 14.

See our Section 8 guide for the full procedural framework.

Practical implication

The dual-route choice was a feature of the AST regime that gave landlords real flexibility. Its abolition is a significant shift in the balance of rights between landlord and tenant. Plan further ahead, document more carefully, and treat possession as a managed legal process rather than a procedural formality.