London Boroughs Unite Against Property Owner Over Eviction Reports
Every single London borough has issued a stark warning to a controversial property owner, threatening a collective boycott of their properties for temporary accommodation if allegations of "mass evictions" are substantiated. This unprecedented move follows disturbing revelations that tenants across Criterion Capital's London portfolio have received Section 21 eviction notices, despite many maintaining perfect rent payment records.
London Councils Takes Formal Action
Last Friday, senior representatives from London Councils—the organization representing all 32 London boroughs plus the City of London—sent a formal letter to Criterion Capital's chief executive, Asif Aziz. The correspondence, signed by councillors Grace Williams of Waltham Forest, Lynne Hale of Croydon, and Jim Millard of Richmond, demands urgent clarification about the reported widespread use of Section 21 notices and the exact number of affected residents.
The letter explicitly references reports suggesting Criterion Capital is "phasing out" private tenancies to transition into becoming a temporary accommodation provider. The councillors warned this strategy could dramatically worsen London's already critical homelessness crisis, describing such a move as "unacceptable" if it involves evicting tenants from secure homes only to re-let the same properties as temporary accommodation funded by local councils.
"Where accommodation providers have engaged in poor practice in the past, we have acted collectively to discourage this, including our members not utilizing temporary accommodation from particular providers," the letter states, adding that similar measures could be implemented against Criterion Capital, potentially blocking their properties from being used for temporary accommodation placements.
The Britannia Point Flashpoint
The controversy first erupted last month when private tenants at Criterion's Britannia Point development in Colliers Wood began receiving two-month eviction notices. Despite initial claims from company representatives that reports of mass evictions were based on "rumours," subsequent investigations revealed that 130 Section 21 notices had been issued at the 19-storey tower, giving residents until April 25 to vacate their homes.
Residents expressed their distress at a well-attended community meeting organized by Merton Labour last month. Many who received notices reported never having missed a rent payment, while others noted that moving would be complicated by ongoing lift failures in the building. Even residents who hadn't received notices expressed anxiety about potentially being caught in what they described as a "mass eviction."
Colliers Wood Labour councillor Stuart Neaverson, who has worked closely with affected residents, told reporters: "Criterion still haven't said anything publicly, and they need to put this in writing to the residents. The two-month ticking clock on that Section 21 notice still stands and needs to be removed."
Mr. Neaverson revealed that Merton Council has maintained a longstanding policy against working with the company, stating unequivocally: "Merton has not, and never will, use this company's properties." Despite this, six other boroughs—Sutton, Kingston, Wandsworth, Hammersmith and Fulham, Tower Hamlets, and Croydon—currently use Britannia Point for temporary accommodation placements.
Wider London Impact
The eviction concerns extend beyond Colliers Wood, with reports emerging that tenants in Criterion-owned blocks such as Delta Point and Canterbury House in Croydon have also received eviction notices. Croydon Labour's mayoral candidate Rowenna Davis described meeting with affected tenants, including one nursing student facing eviction during her exams despite being a model tenant who always paid rent on time.
"Housing should not be allowed to operate like this in 21st century Britain," Davis asserted, while praising the London Councils letter as "excellent and having my full support." She added: "It is really great to see different boroughs and parties coming together to stand up against injustice and make sure that one rogue landlord can't play councils off against each other."
The Homelessness Context
London Councils reports that approximately one in fifty Londoners are currently homeless and living in temporary accommodation, including roughly one in twenty-one children. Boroughs collectively spend around £5.5 million daily supporting homeless households—a staggering cost that has risen sharply and represents one of the most significant financial pressures facing local authorities.
Councillor Neaverson described the London Councils letter as an "encouraging sign" that boroughs could mount a collective response, noting: "I don't think there's a precedent for something like this. The signs I have been getting from London Councils have been really positive. I think a lot of people, regardless of political background, are saying this is unacceptable."
Criterion Capital's Response
A spokesperson for Criterion Capital defended the company's actions, stating: "Recent coverage has materially misrepresented and politicised routine and lawful tenancy matters. A limited number of statutory notices were served in full compliance with the Housing Act 2004 in respect of periodic tenancies held by private tenants paying market rents."
The company claims these notices formed part of "a standard asset management process to review and regularise occupation terms across parts of the portfolio," insisting there has been "no policy to vacate entire buildings" and that "only a small proportion—fewer than 5%—of tenants across the portfolio have been served notice."
Criterion Capital maintains that "claims that 'hundreds' of tenants are being evicted, or that this represents a 'mass eviction' across London, are factually incorrect and are likely to be politically motivated," adding that "the lawful conclusion of a periodic tenancy, in accordance with statutory notice provisions, is not synonymous with homelessness."
London Councils requested a response from Criterion Capital by March 10 and asked for a meeting with senior representatives. At the time of publication, no response had been received, leaving London's boroughs poised to implement what could become one of the most significant collective actions against a property owner in the capital's recent history.
