It’s just before 10.30am and there is already a heightened sense of anxiety in the waiting room at Dartford County Court.

Here, as in other civil courts up and down the land, homeowners unable to keep up with mortgage payments will see their homes repossessed, and tenants — whose monthly rent has fallen into arrears — will witness the first stone skipped towards bailiffs potentially knocking.

Throughout the day we’ll hear from everyone from a young mum with a severely disabled child who faces being turfed out over the Christmas holidays, to a taxi driver who claims he’s “suffering psychologically” trying to evict his nightmare tenants.

Decisions in most hearings will take anywhere between three and 12 minutes.

Ministry of Justice figures show that, between July and September, there were 693 possession order claims for social and private renters brought in courts across Kent and Medway — the highest of anywhere in the country outside of London (Essex came next on 557, followed by Hertfordshire on 479).

Of these, Dartford recorded the most with 14.7 claims per 10,000 households, followed closely by Gravesham with 14.2 and Medway 11.7. Ashford had the fewest by comparison with just 4.3.

But in all but one area of the county (Canterbury) they are rising. Following the pandemic pause in evictions across 2020/21, which saw claims fall to a record low, they are now on the rise again.

Between 2022 and 2023 (the last two periods for which a full year’s set of data is available) there’s been a 25% increase in claims from 2,410 to 3,026.

It’s a 127% jump on 2021 and a sobering set of statistics given what’s at stake is potentially the roof over someone’s head.

That’s what has brought me to Dartford on a cold, rainy Tuesday morning in December — to witness first-hand just how well one of Kent’s busiest county courts is coping with the current case workload.

Amid the nervous shuffling of feet, parents push prams up and down the corridor as lawyers furiously type away at laptops tucked on their laps. The phone barely stops ringing as the sole female court clerk bounces back and forth answering it and delivering hand-written messages scrawled on tiny post-it notes to one of the four courtrooms.

Pinned to the notice board outside court two is a long list of housing cases, known as possession claims, which, for some will signal the start of the eviction process — and among them the very real risk of homelessness.

District Judge Edwin OmoRegie is presiding over this morning’s bumper set of 22 listings.

However, in a bizarre twist, the first person to give a representation to court this morning is neither a disgruntled landlord or a tearful tenant — no, it is, in fact, me.

The first case, listed for 10.30am as ‘Regional Housing Limited versus Mr Ashton Leonard Cerasoli’ gets under way but the duty solicitor has raised an objection to my reporting on it.

The lawyer argues his case on behalf of his client, a housing company, for my exclusion on the basis it concerns private information of a “highly, sensitive” and “commercial” nature.

He’s reminded by the judge that proceedings are being heard in open court, which entitles the press to report — but the solicitor replies that he “really must insist”.

This judge isn’t convinced, and after briefly asking for my thoughts on the matter, he orders we proceed.

As it turns out, the case is a straightforward Section 21 application — something I’ll be seeing a fair bit of — to repossess a property. The respondent has not filed a defence and the judge grants an order for possession and fixed costs, as well as £391 court and £69.50 solicitor’s fees.

The next case follows the same formulaic process.

“Rent arrears total £13,300. No payment for over six months. Asking for an order for possession within 14 days.”

It’s granted but an application to accelerate the process to the High Court using the discretionary power granted to a District Judge is refused.

At this point I should point out that under the current law there are two routes of gaining possession of a residential property let under what’s called an assured shorthold tenancy agreement — a common contract drawn up in the private rented sector.

Section 8 notices are generally used when the tenant is in breach of the tenancy, for example owing at least two months’ rent, but usually it’s enforced for “serious rent arrears”.

Whereas, the more controversial Section 21 notices, known as starting a ‘no-fault’ eviction process, are when the landlord requests possession regardless of the tenant’s actions and doesn’t need to state why.

If possession is granted by the court, the landlord can seek enforcement if the tenant doesn’t leave by the time stipulated in the order. This is what’s known as a warrant for eviction — and means they can use court bailiffs to evict you. Any attempt to force you to leave before this is illegal.

In another case I observe, a tenant faces eviction after racking up large rent arrears.

The respondent, a Mr Ojeme, shuffles his way to the front of the courtroom in a black puffer jacket and plants himself in front of the judge. His Crayford landlords are in court too, representing themselves, and bring forward their claim for repossession under Section 8.

But this time there is a delay as the paperwork is not in order.

A rent statement showing what payments were due and received to demonstrate how the arrears claimed have accrued hasn’t been provided.

The claimant asks: “I have it, but it’s in my head. Can I write it down?”

“Not really” is the judge’s wry reply as he orders an adjournment.

“This does not mean this is going away,” he tells Mr Ojeme, before turning back to the landlords. “What I’m going to do is adjourn for you [the claimants] to produce the rent statement.

“We do have a backlog and it does not mean you come back in 14 days but the New Year.”

And just like that it’s to the back of the queue.

It’s not the only case to be put on the back burner. Another hearing is adjourned as the respondent cannot attend court the judge hears, because he has “broken his hand”.

The landlord seeking possession does not seem convinced and is sceptical at the medical grounds accepted for adjournment. It’ll be at least the end of January before he can return despite having waited months already.

More sympathy is evoked in the courtroom by a case heard just before the lunch hour in which a young mum to a severely disabled child finds herself at the start of the eviction process after being served a notice to quit at her privately rented accommodation in Southwark.

The court hears of the “mixed-up situation” the young mum has found herself in after obtaining a tenancy from a company which had leased it from a property management group, which, in turn, obtained it from somebody else.

“I will grant this possession order [for 14 days] but you need to inform the council now to make arrangements for you in terms of housing,” the judge tells the mum. “Don’t wait for the bailiffs.”

It’s an all too familiar tale. A landlord serves a “no-fault” notice to a tenant to end the tenancy who in turn goes to the local authority housing team for help, only to be told they won’t help until the bailiffs arrive.

If they vacate the property beforehand, they risk being deemed “intentionally homeless”, thus losing any support they are entitled to from the council.

It shouldn’t be the case according to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, which previously ruled that a council should not have waited until the eviction date to rehouse a mother, and instead should have done so when she first presented as being made homeless.

Sadly, however, as an estate agent informs me, the blanket policy of telling recently evicted private tenants to stay put and wait for the bailiffs to arrive is still observed by various local authorities in an attempt to better manage their dwindling social housing stock.

After lunch we’re back in court and hear another “Section 21” case.

The respondent attends via a dial-in link as he’s on police bail for a suspected offence not disclosed to the hearing.

This is my first time in court. I'm suffering psychologically

In his place is his wife and their 15-year-old daughter who, the court hears, is out of school as she is “ill” but will be serving as stand-in interpreter for her parents who struggle with English.

Through the on-duty housing adviser they claim they are the victims of a retaliatory eviction after raising issue with the state of the property with the landlords.

But the applicant, referred to throughout as Mr Islam and who too is assisted by a family member in court due to language difficulties, takes exception to this.

He tells the court: “The rent it get is the same as my mortgage and last two years I have worked as a taxi driver to levy that mortgage.

“The property is ruined. Me and my wife are whole life working, saving to provide this. Now when I go, I want to cry. Also he has got extra people living there without my consent.”

He adds: “It’s going to cause me lots of financial trouble. They do not provide any evidence. He has had a long time to provide something. This is my first time in court. I’m suffering psychologically.”

But ultimately the claim for possession is dismissed on a technicality as the notice is invalid.

A landlord cannot serve a section 21 notice to evict a tenant if the tenant’s deposit is not protected in an authorised scheme within 30 days of receiving the deposit — and on that basis the claim fails.

Campaigners have warned landlords are rushing to force out tenants as Labour’s ban on ‘no-fault’ evictions looms.

Sir Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner have promised to outlaw Section 21 evictions, with the ban expected to be in place by next summer.

The Renters’ Reform Coalition said is is concerned that, with Christmas approaching, thousands of renters are still being forced out of their homes.

Alongside other housing charities, they are calling for the passage of the Renters’ Rights Bill to be accelerated, with almost 110,000 households now having been evicted under Section 21 since Ex-PM Theresa May promised to ban it in April 2019.

Chris Thomas, a spokesperson for the Kent-based homeless charity Porchlight, says the ban can’t come soon enough — but more detail on protections for renters is needed.

“The sooner the Renters’ Reform Bill goes through the better,” he says.

“We work with a lot of people who have lost their homes because the landlord has used a Section 21 eviction notice to get rid of them within two months,” he explained.

“And sometimes that might be because they want to sell up, or turn the property into an Airbnb, which seems more lucrative.”

Despite their support for the ban the charity communicator was at pains to point out there are legitimate reasons for section 21s and the charity in no way wished to “demonise” landlords for wanting to reclaim their property when there are good reasons for doing so.

He added: “This isn’t Porchlight going against Section 21s but we are going against the misuse of Section 21 notices which we do see a lot and that contributes to homelessness in Kent and everywhere really.

“Everyone deserves somewhere safe and secure to live and it’s not fair if they can be evicted from their home for no reason with just two months’ notice.

Ultimately we need more social homes so people can afford to live without being pushed to the absolute limit…

Going forward he would like to see more protections built in for renters to guard against homelessness.

“We’d also like to see rent increases during tenancies capped in line with inflation or wage growth so people are not just priced out of their homes,” he added.

“Ultimately we need more social homes so people can afford to live without being pushed to the absolute limit and to remove this fear of being moved out of their own home hanging over them.”

But while there is not widespread opposition to the move to ban ‘no-fault’ evictions there remain outstanding concerns.

After the Renters’ Rights Bill becomes law, it’s estimated legal costs for landlords will significantly increase, while backed-up county courts will also result in longer periods with tenants in arrears.

At present the current government guidelines estimate an eight-week wait for a possession hearing.

But in areas, like Kent, which are already suffering a huge backlog this is likely to be higher.

This has led to calls to strengthen the court system before Section 8 becomes the sole eviction process.

During an initial reading of Renters’ Reform Bill in Parliament, Conservative MP Jerome Mayhew told the House: “When we move to a Section 8 ground, that will require more resources and scrutiny, quite rightly, but without investment in the court system, we will not deliver what either renters or landlords need.”

At the last hearing of the day at Dartford County Court we hear from Mr Sardar Mohamed, who has endured a nightmare 13-year ordeal with an unresponsive tenant.

The 62-year-old Met Police interpreter, who invested in a four-bed property in Abbey Wood, south London, with his business partner, who is also in attendance, is seeking to use a Section 8 on the basis of non-payment of rent and significant rent arrears.

He’s been here before.

At least three times he tells the court she’s failed to pay and the judge grants his order as the dossier of evidence he has provided on non-payment of rent is clearly proven.

Outside the court, Mr Mohamed tells me he’s tried to help but ultimately after more than a decade his patience has worn thin.

“For four months she didn’t pay anything,” he says. “We could not even get in the house.

“I had to beg her in order to get an electrician in to see the property. He tells me it stinks inside, so much so he had to put on a mask.

“The council say ‘if you don’t do something we will take action’.

“We have been very good to her and try to help. We are socialists, we respect people more than money but sometimes they take the mick. They don’t appreciate.

“How many landlords can you say in 10 years they have never put up the rent?”

With the eviction ban looming and experts predicting an even more difficult landscape for landlords seeking repossession, I ask Mr Mohamed if he knew what he does now back when he initially invested in his sole rental property whether he would do the same.

“First thing I’m going to do [when I get it back] is renovate and then sell it,” he replies.