A married couple have been ordered to pay £17,918 after a Lewisham Council prosecution over the illegal eviction and harassment of a tenant, with the court also awarding £5,000 in compensation.
Mary Lewis was sentenced for illegally evicting the occupier, while Peter Lewis was sentenced for harassment intended to force him out. The case was heard after the tenant, who had rented a room in the property since 2017, was told to leave and later found the locks removed and his belongings left on the roadside.
Illegal eviction prosecutions still matter because they show councils are willing to pursue criminal cases, not just civil penalties, where landlords bypass the possession process. For compliant landlords, the case is another reminder that the legal route is slower and costlier than many would like, but trying to go around it can end far worse.
Lewisham court case shows the cost of bypassing possession rules
According to the report of the prosecution, the tenant explained in December 2023 that the proper legal process had to be followed to end his tenancy. Instead, the locks to the property and his room were removed, threats were made, and most of his possessions were stolen before he could recover them.
The court was told the tenant, who has a heart condition, became unwell during the incident and was admitted to hospital overnight. More than two years later, he had still not found permanent accommodation.
This follows Residential Landlord’s recent reporting on a Haringey tenant winning £7,884 after an unlicensed HMO case and earlier coverage of a wider sentencing review for housing offences. The latest Lewisham case adds a harder point: councils are still prepared to prosecute when an eviction moves beyond a paperwork breach and into intimidation.
The penalties were split between both defendants. Mary Lewis was ordered to pay a £560 fine, £3,000 compensation and £6,059 in prosecution costs, while Peter Lewis was ordered to pay a £240 fine, £2,000 compensation and the same £6,059 cost contribution.
Rogue landlord enforcement is becoming more visible again
The timing matters because councils are under pressure to show they will use the housing enforcement tools they already have. High-profile prosecutions help them do that, especially where the facts are stark and the case can be framed as protection against a clearly unlawful eviction.
There is still a practical warning here for landlords who are frustrated with delays in the courts. However difficult the current possession system may be, removing access, threatening a tenant or disposing of belongings is not an aggressive shortcut – it is the sort of conduct that can hand a council a clear prosecution case.
Opinion
No landlord should need telling this, but cases like this keep happening because some still think pressure and lock changes can replace due process. They cannot. With councils keen to prove they will act, illegal eviction is one of the clearest ways for a routine possession dispute to become a criminal enforcement story.
