Court fee increases – what this really means for landlords (July 2026)

From 13 July 2026 the Ministry of Justice intends to increase a range of civil court fees, including those most commonly encountered in residential possession proceedings. The increases are modest in headline terms – broadly around 2.6% – and subject to Parliamentary approval, which in practice is unlikely to present any obstacle. On one level, therefore, this may appear unremarkable. In reality, however, these incremental changes sit within a much wider and more troubling context for landlords who rely on the court system to recover possession of their properties. 

The headline changes for possession and enforcement 

For landlords and agents involved in possession claims, aside from the court issue fee rising from £404 to £414, the most relevant increases relate to enforcement and interim applications rather than the issue fee for the claim itself. The fee for a warrant of possession executed by a county court bailiff will rise from £148 to £152. A writ of possession in the High Court will increase from £80 to £82. Warrants of control used to pursue rent arrears will increase from £94 to £96. Applications made on Form N244 will also rise, with applications requiring a hearing increasing from £313 to £321 and applications without a hearing increasing from £123 to £126. 

Individually these sums are small. Taken in isolation, none of them is likely to change a landlord’s decision-making. The difficulty is that possession cases rarely involve a single fee, incurred once, followed by a smooth and predictable process. 

The cumulative cost problem 

In practice, possession litigation has become a process of attrition. A typical case may involve the issue fee, one or more interim applications, enforcement fees and, increasingly, additional applications prompted by tenant resistance at the enforcement stage. Each individual step may appear manageable, but the cumulative effect is significant, particularly for landlords with portfolios or for those already absorbing lost rent over many months. 

These court fee increases reinforce a point that many landlords have learned the hard way over the past few years: court costs are no longer a marginal consideration. They are a real and often unrecoverable part of the cost of doing business as a residential landlord where court action becomes necessary.

Delay-driven applications and tactical use of N244s 

One area where the increases are likely to be felt most keenly is in relation to tenant applications made shortly before eviction. Applications to suspend or stay warrants, typically made using Form N244, have become increasingly common. Some are well-founded and raise genuine issues of hardship or procedural fairness. Many, however, are tactical and aimed at buying time. 

From a landlord’s perspective, these applications are particularly frustrating. They usually arise late in the day, require urgent legal input, often lead to last-minute hearings, and almost invariably delay recovery of possession even where the landlord ultimately succeeds. The increase in N244 fees marginally increases the cost of dealing with these applications, but the real cost remains the lost rent and continued inability to re-let or recover control of the property. 

What is important to understand is that these applications are not going away. If anything, the continued pressure on tenants from the cost of living and the tightening of the private rented sector makes last-ditch applications more likely, not less. 

Court backlogs: cautious optimism, not complacency There are some tentative signs that the worst of the post-pandemic court backlogs may be easing. In some courts, listing times for possession hearings and bailiff appointments have improved slightly. That is welcome and should not be dismissed. 

However, from day-to-day experience, the picture remains highly inconsistent. Some courts are functioning reasonably efficiently; others remain badly overstretched. Bailiff availability continues to be a bottleneck in many areas. One suspended eviction or adjourned hearing can still add months to the lifespan of a case. 

Against that background, even small increases in fees feel more acute. Landlords are not simply paying more; they are paying more for a system that remains slow, unpredictable and, at times, difficult to navigate. 

Timing and tactical considerations 

Where landlords are already part-way through proceedings or approaching enforcement, timing may matter. In appropriate cases, progressing enforcement steps before 13 July 2026 may marginally reduce outlay. More importantly, early and proactive advice can often reduce the risk of unnecessary applications or procedural missteps that create opportunities for delay. In my experience, many of the most costly possession cases are not those with the highest court fees, but those where avoidable delays creep in through technical errors, late instructions or a failure to anticipate tenant responses. 

Recoverability: the uncomfortable reality 

Although court fees are, in theory, recoverable from tenants and can be added to the judgment debt, the reality is often very different. Many tenants facing possession proceedings are simply unable to pay. Even where costs are awarded, enforcement is frequently uneconomic or impractical. 

Landlords should therefore approach court fees on the assumption that they are a sunk cost rather than a recoverable debt. This does not mean they should not pursue possession where justified, but it does mean that budgeting for litigation must be realistic and commercially grounded.

 What landlords should take from this 

The July 2026 fee increases do not fundamentally change the legal landscape. They do, however, underline an existing trend. Possession proceedings are becoming steadily more expensive, slower and more procedurally complex. Small increases in fees matter because they sit on top of delay, lost rent and limited prospects of recovery. 

For landlords, the key is not panic but preparation. Reviewing ongoing cases, acting promptly when enforcement is required, and taking early advice when difficulties are anticipated can make a material difference. In a system where delay is often the tenant’s greatest leverage, avoiding unnecessary procedural detours is as important as the merits of the case itself. 

Further information about the fee changes is available on the GOV.UK website. 

If you would like advice on how these increases, and the wider court environment, may affect your specific circumstances, you should take advice tailored to your property and your case. If you would like advice on possession proceedings, enforcement or commercial disputes please contact Rebecca Roberts, Associate Solicitor in the Dispute Resolution team at Dean Wilson LLP.