< img src="https://www.propertywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/property-news-1773216086525.jpg"alt =""> A property owner in Guernsey has actually incurred almost ₤ 20,000 in legal charges whilst trying to kick out a renter through the courts system, highlighting the monetary problem faced by homeowner in tenant-landlord disagreements.
Fallon Bewey, who owns a rental property on the island, reported that her renter refused to abandon the property in November in 2015 following the expiration of an one-year tenancy arrangement. The case is not arranged to be heard until June this year, representing a seven-month hold-up.
Legal expenses and court delays
“Going through the courts is costly and time-consuming, and it’s actually worrying that it can cost a property owner who hasn’t broken the agreement 10s of countless pounds,” Bewey told ITV News.
The working mother-of-two stated that she does not feel supported by the courts or police. “The occupancy contract, which I think to be legally binding, was not enforced at all by the courts, and they were not interested that the occupancy had actually been breached,” she stated.
Real estate crisis impact
Bewey kept in mind that the real estate lack in Guernsey affects eviction procedures. “The real estate crisis in Guernsey indicates that stays of expulsion are issued based upon the ability for a tenant to find alternative accommodation, indicating the responsibility for this issue falls on the proprietor,” she explained.
The proprietor stressed that not all homeowner on the island are professional property owners. “There are numerous situations where individuals have rental residential or commercial properties due to individual scenarios, such as the breakdown of marriages, and there are numerous pensioners who have it as their main source of income,” she stated.
Legislative context
The Tenants’ Rights Act, arranged to come into force in the UK in May, will not use in the Channel Islands, indicating Guernsey’s rental market operates under separate legal frameworks.
The case shows the financial and procedural obstacles dealing with proprietors in jurisdictions where court stockpiles and real estate lacks make complex ownership procedures, with possible ramifications for the viability of small-scale property financial investment in the area.