Protection from Eviction Act 1977: Illegal Eviction, Harassment and Excluded Occupiers

The Protection from Eviction Act 1977 makes it a criminal offence to remove a residential occupier from their home other than by following lawful procedure. It creates two offences — unlawful eviction (section 1(2)) and harassment (section 1(3) and 1(3A)) — each triable either way, carrying up to 2 years' imprisonment and, since 12 March 2015, an unlimited fine even on summary conviction. Since 1 May 2026, under changes made by the Renters' Rights Act 2025, local councils can also impose a civil penalty of up to £40,000 as an alternative to prosecution. The Act separates "excluded occupiers" (lodgers of a resident landlord, holiday lets, hostel residents and similar — removable on reasonable notice without a court order) from "non-excluded occupiers" (almost all tenants — removable only by court order and bailiff-enforced warrant). This page explains both offences, the penalties (criminal and civil), the excluded/non-excluded distinction, and the errors that most often turn a landlord into a defendant.

Key takeaways

• Two criminal offences exist: unlawful eviction (physically or effectively removing an occupier) and harassment (conduct intended, or known/reasonably believed likely, to make the occupier leave or give up a right).
• Penalties are severe: up to 2 years' imprisonment on indictment, an unlimited fine at every level since 2015, plus a separate civil damages claim under the Housing Act 1988 and, from 1 May 2026, a council civil penalty of up to £40,000.
• Only a court order (enforced by bailiffs) can lawfully remove a non-excluded occupier — that covers almost every assured tenant. There is no lawful self-help route, however strong the landlord's underlying case.
• Excluded occupiers are a narrow category — mainly lodgers sharing a home with a resident landlord — and even they cannot be forced out, threatened, or have their belongings removed.
• The Renters' Rights Act 2025 changed the surrounding eviction process (Section 21 abolished, periodic assured tenancies, wider Section 8 grounds) but did not weaken the 1977 Act's ban on self-help — if anything, enforcement against illegal eviction has strengthened.

What the Act does

The Protection from Eviction Act 1977 is the statute that makes "no eviction without lawful process" a matter of criminal law, not just civil procedure, for almost all residential occupiers in England and Wales. It predates the assured tenancy regime and has not been repealed or weakened by any of the tenancy reforms since — including the Renters' Rights Act 2025, which in fact added a new enforcement power (see Penalties below).

The Act is short but consequential. A landlord frustrated that a tenant has not left after notice has expired sometimes changes the locks while the tenant is at work, or cuts off the electricity to "encourage" a move. Both are criminal offences under the Act regardless of how strong the landlord's underlying possession case is. The tenant's civil claim for damages and reinstatement in those circumstances is typically straightforward to bring, because the landlord's own conduct — not the merits of the tenancy dispute — is what's in issue.

The two criminal offences

Section 1(2) — unlawful eviction

Under section 1 of the Act, it is an offence if any person unlawfully deprives a residential occupier of their occupation of the premises, or any part of it, or attempts to do so. This covers:

• Physically removing the occupier or preventing their return.
• Changing the locks while the occupier is temporarily absent.
• Removing the occupier's belongings from the property.
• Cutting off gas, electricity, water, or other services to force the occupier out (this can also be charged as harassment — see below).
• Refusing to let the occupier back in after a short absence.

The offence can be committed by the landlord, the landlord's agent, or anyone acting on the landlord's instructions. It is a defence to prove that the person believed, and had reasonable cause to believe, that the occupier had already ceased to reside at the property — but instructing someone else to change the locks does not itself provide a defence for the landlord.

Section 1(3) and 1(3A) — harassment

Section 1(3) is a general harassment offence: it applies to any person who, with intent to cause a residential occupier to give up occupation or to refrain from exercising a right or remedy, does acts likely to interfere with the peace or comfort of the occupier or their household, or persistently withdraws or withholds services reasonably required for the occupation.

Section 1(3A), inserted by section 29 of the Housing Act 1988, created a second, easier-to-prove harassment offence that applies specifically to the landlord or the landlord's agent. It does not require proof of specific intent — it is enough that the landlord (or agent) does the same acts knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the conduct is likely to cause the occupier to give up occupation or a right. Section 1(3B) gives a defence where the person had reasonable grounds for doing the acts or withholding the services (for example, a genuine, properly notified service interruption for essential repairs).

Conduct that has founded harassment prosecutions includes:

• Cutting off heating or hot water, particularly in winter.
• Repeated unannounced visits or entry without notice.
• Threats — "I'll make life difficult if you don't leave", or similar.
• Removing external doors or windows.
• Interfering with the occupier's post.
• Damaging or removing the occupier's belongings.

Penalties

Criminal penalties

Both offences are triable either way. Under section 1(4):

• Summary conviction (magistrates' court): a fine and/or up to 6 months' imprisonment. The fine was historically capped at "the prescribed sum" (£5,000), but section 85 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 removed that cap for offences committed on or after 12 March 2015 — the fine on summary conviction is now unlimited too.
• Conviction on indictment (Crown Court): an unlimited fine and/or up to 2 years' imprisonment.

Civil damages — Housing Act 1988, sections 27–28

Separately from any prosecution, a non-excluded residential occupier who has been unlawfully evicted has a statutory civil claim under sections 27 and 28 of the Housing Act 1988. The measure of damages is not a fixed sum — it is the difference between the value of the landlord's interest in the property immediately before the occupier was evicted, valued on the assumption the occupier remained entitled to stay, and its value on the assumption the occupier had no such right (broadly, the vacant-possession premium the landlord gained by evicting unlawfully). Because this is tied to property values, awards can be very substantial, especially in high-value areas — but the exact figure is fact-specific and calculated on the statutory basis, not a tariff. A court retains discretion to reduce the award in defined circumstances, including where the occupier's own conduct makes a reduction reasonable, or where the occupier has since been reinstated. This liability exists in addition to any criminal fine and is separate from a general damages/reinstatement claim in tort.

New: council civil penalties (from 1 May 2026)

The Renters' Rights Act 2025 inserted a new section 1A into the 1977 Act, giving local housing authorities the power to impose a civil penalty of up to £40,000 for an offence under section 1, as an alternative to prosecution. A landlord (or agent) cannot be both prosecuted and given a civil penalty for the same conduct — the local authority must choose one route. This sits alongside councils' existing power to seek a banning order against a landlord convicted of, or penalised for, an illegal eviction offence. See the government's civil penalties guidance under the Renters' Rights Act 2025.

Rent repayment orders

Illegal eviction under section 1 of the 1977 Act is also a rent-repayment-order offence: an affected tenant, or the local authority on their behalf, can apply to the First-tier Tribunal for repayment of rent already paid. See gov.uk's rent repayment order guidance for how these are assessed and the current maximum period.

Taken together — prosecution, statutory civil damages, a council civil penalty, and a rent repayment order are all potentially available from a single illegal eviction, though prosecution and the section 1A civil penalty cannot both apply to the same conduct. There is no realistic scenario in which changing the locks on a non-excluded occupier is cheaper or faster than using the court process.

Excluded vs non-excluded occupiers

The Act's practical effect on a landlord depends entirely on which category the occupier falls into.

Excluded occupiers

Section 3A defines a narrow list of excluded tenancies and licences. The main categories:

• Lodgers sharing accommodation with a resident landlord — the landlord (or a member of the landlord's family) occupies the property as their only or principal home, both before the letting began and at the point it ends, and shares living accommodation with the occupier.
• Temporary expedients granted to a former trespasser — someone who entered as a trespasser and was then given a short-term licence to remain (not the same as a trespasser who was never granted any right at all — see below).
• Holiday lettings.
• Hostel accommodation provided by specified social/charitable bodies.
• Asylum-seeker accommodation provided under Part 6 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.

Excluded occupiers can be asked to leave on reasonable notice without a court order. But they are still protected against force, threats, and harassment — the landlord cannot remove belongings, change locks while the occupier is present, or use section 1(3)/1(3A) conduct against them. In practice, "reasonable notice" for a lodger is normally treated as at least the length of a rental payment period.

A genuine trespasser — someone who was never granted any right to be there at all — is not a "residential occupier" under section 1(1) in the first place and so falls outside the Act's protection entirely. This is different from someone who entered as a trespasser and was then given a temporary excluded licence under section 3A; once that licence exists, the occupier is protected as an excluded occupier. Landlords should be cautious here: anyone with any apparent right to be at the property (a former tenant, a family member, an ex-partner) is very unlikely to be a "true" trespasser, and treating them as one is a common and costly error.

Non-excluded occupiers

Everyone else — which in practice means almost every assured tenant (now, since 1 May 2026, an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988 as amended by the Renters' Rights Act 2025) and most licensees with a genuine right to occupy. Non-excluded occupiers can only lawfully be removed by:

1. Valid notice. A Section 8 notice under the Housing Act 1988, citing one or more of the statutory grounds — Section 21 no-fault notices were abolished from 1 May 2026 and can no longer be served. (A Section 21 notice served before that date, and any related Form N5B accelerated possession claim already issued, continues under transitional rules.) For non-excluded licensees outside the assured tenancy regime, section 5 of the 1977 Act itself requires any notice to quit to be in writing and give at least 4 weeks.
2. Expiry of the notice period. Section 8 notice periods now vary by ground — for example, the Ground 8 mandatory rent-arrears ground requires arrears of at least 3 months (13 weeks for a weekly tenancy) and a minimum 4-week notice period, both increased by the Renters' Rights Act 2025.
3. A court possession claim, if the occupier has not left — issued in the County Court, supported by evidence of the ground(s) relied on.
4. A possession order from the court.
5. A warrant of possession, enforced by county court bailiffs (or High Court enforcement officers where transferred), if the occupier still does not leave voluntarily.

Only step 5 — physical enforcement of a warrant — actually authorises the landlord to retake physical possession. Nothing earlier in that sequence, including a possession order on its own, permits the landlord to change the locks.

Common landlord errors

1. Changing the locks before the warrant is enforced

Even after a possession order, the landlord has no lawful right to retake the property until the warrant has been executed by bailiffs. Acting on the order yourself is unlawful eviction.

2. Assuming every occupier needs a court order

Genuine lodgers of a resident landlord are excluded occupiers and can be asked to leave on reasonable notice without going to court — provided no force, threats, or removal of belongings is involved. Over-caution here can cost a landlord months of unnecessary occupation by someone with no statutory security of tenure.

3. Treating a tenant as if they were a lodger

The more common and more dangerous error runs the other way: an arrangement is labelled a "lodger" or licence arrangement, but the substance — exclusive occupation of self-contained accommodation, no genuinely resident landlord — makes it a tenancy. Status is determined by the facts, not the label on the paperwork. See our lodger vs tenant guide.

4. Cutting off utilities to pressure a non-paying tenant

Cutting gas, electricity or water to "encourage" a tenant to leave is harassment under section 1(3A) — a criminal offence — even where the tenant is genuinely in serious arrears. Arrears are addressed through the Section 8 process (Grounds 8, 10, 11), not self-help.

5. Removing belongings before lawful removal

Removing an occupier's belongings while they are still lawfully in occupation is unlawful eviction, even if the landlord's intention is to "store" rather than dispose of them. Wait until the occupier has been lawfully removed — by bailiffs under a warrant, or by voluntarily leaving — before touching their property.

6. Threats and pressure

Verbal or written threats — "things will start happening if you don't leave", repeated unannounced visits, letters designed to intimidate — can constitute harassment even without any physical act. Keep all landlord–tenant communication in writing, professional, and dated, even where the tenant is genuinely at fault.

When self-help is lawful

Self-help is permitted only in narrow circumstances:

• An excluded occupier has left and is not returning — once notice has been given and expired and the occupier is genuinely absent, not merely out for the day, the landlord may retake possession without a court order.
• A true trespasser with no right at all — someone who never had any licence or agreement to be there. This category is narrower than most landlords assume; anyone with a plausible claim to a right of occupation should be treated as requiring a court order.
• After a warrant of possession has been executed by bailiffs — at that point the property is lawfully back in the landlord's hands.

Outside these situations, self-help is unlawful regardless of how clear-cut the underlying possession case looks. Given the combination of criminal prosecution, statutory civil damages, a council civil penalty of up to £40,000, and a possible rent repayment order, the court route — however slow it can feel — is the only route that does not expose the landlord to open-ended liability.

---

This is legal information, not legal advice. It explains the general law of England & Wales as at the date shown above and does not take account of your specific circumstances. Reading it does not create a solicitor–client relationship. Tenancy Agreement Service is not a law firm and is not regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. If you are facing a specific illegal eviction, harassment, or possession situation, speak to a regulated solicitor or contact your local council's tenancy relations team.