Ground 9 — Part I and Part II routes, criteria and notice
Ground 9 HA 1988 Schedule 2: suitable alternative accommodation is available for the tenant when the possession order takes effect. Two routes: Part I — local authority certifies it will provide suitable alternative accommodation (uncommon for private landlords); Part II — private alternative accommodation meets all statutory criteria: (a) lets on assured tenancy or equivalent security (tenant not offered less secure tenancy than current); (b) reasonably suitable as regards proximity to place of work (not significantly further and causing hardship); (c) reasonably suitable as regards rent (comparable level; not significantly more expensive); (d) reasonably suitable as regards extent and character (similar size; adequate for household; comparable type of property and amenities). Notice: Section 8 notice specifying Ground 9; minimum 2 months' notice. From 1 May 2026 (RRA 2025): new prescribed notice replaces Section 8 form; 2-month minimum retained.
- All four Part II criteria must be met — failing on any one (e.g., the alternative property is significantly further from work; at a markedly higher rent; substantially smaller) will defeat the Ground 9 claim; courts scrutinise all four criteria independently
- DISCRETIONARY: court considers both whether the alternative accommodation meets the criteria AND whether it is reasonable to grant possession — factors: landlord's genuine need; disruption to tenant; tenant's length of occupation; personal circumstances (elderly; disabled; young children); whether landlord has acted in good faith
- Evidence required: details of alternative property (tenancy agreement; rent; address; size; photographs); independent assessment that Part II criteria are met; written offer letter to tenant; comparison of current and alternative rents; tenant's response to the offer
- Practical use: where landlord wishes to redevelop and offer tenant an alternative property; portfolio reorganisation where landlord can rehouse tenant in another property they own; occasionally used as a more reputationally favourable alternative to Ground 6
Overlap with Ground 6, RRA 2025 significance and devolved positions
Ground 9 vs Ground 6 (redevelopment): Ground 6 is mandatory — requires genuine intention to demolish/reconstruct the dwelling or carry out substantial works requiring possession of the whole property; no alternative accommodation required. Ground 9 is discretionary and requires actual alternative accommodation to be available. Both can be pleaded in the alternative in the same possession claim. Post-RRA 2025 (England from 1 May 2026): with Section 21 abolished, Ground 9 becomes more strategically significant — a landlord who genuinely owns or can arrange comparable alternative accommodation has a route to non-fault possession without Section 21. The discretionary nature means success depends heavily on the quality of the alternative accommodation and the circumstances of the tenancy.
- RRA 2025 from 1 May 2026: Ground 9 retained as discretionary; new prescribed notice procedure; 2-month minimum notice retained; for transitional ASTs (pre-May 2026), check transitional provisions for notices served around commencement date
- Scotland: PRT 18 grounds — no direct Ground 9 equivalent; PRT Ground 8 (substantial refurbishment requiring vacant possession) is more relevant for redevelopment scenarios; Ground 9 alternative accommodation concept does not exist in PRT framework; seek Scottish-specific advice
- Wales: RHWA 2016 occupation contracts — different framework from HA 1988; estate management grounds in the occupation contract may cover situations where the landlord needs to recover possession for particular purposes; Welsh-specific legal advice required; NI: PT(NI)O 2006 grounds — includes possession for landlord's intended occupation and major works; no direct Ground 9 equivalent but similar principles in court's discretion
- Warning against using Ground 9 for inadequate alternatives: a landlord who offers an inferior property and relies on Ground 9 faces likely failure AND adverse costs; the courts treat this as a serious claim; only use Ground 9 where the alternative genuinely meets all four Part II criteria and you have independent evidence to demonstrate this