‘My House, My Rules’? Why That’s Not How the Law Works

Viral landlord–tenant dispute exposes common myths about eviction and what renters can do if they’re told to leave

A viral exchange between a tenant and her landlord has reignited public debate over tenant protection laws and the limits of a property owner’s rights.

The landlord, who reportedly demanded that his tenant “leave by the end of the month” so his sister could move in, has become a cautionary tale for landlords who confuse ownership with total control — and for tenants unsure of their legal footing when faced with threats of eviction.

In screenshots shared online, tenant Demi was blindsided by text messages telling her to vacate her home. When she reminded the landlord that she was only halfway through her tenancy agreement, he dismissed her response with the now-infamous line: “It’s my property and I make the rules.”

That phrase — echoed in countless online landlord forums — perfectly captures the legal misunderstanding at the heart of many rental disputes: owning a property does not exempt you from the law.

The facts behind the fallout

According to reports, the landlord told Demi to leave so his sister could move in, giving her only a few weeks’ notice. When she refused, he threatened to change the locks.

The messages were later reposted by property commentator Jack Rooke, who confirmed that the tenant was legally protected under her tenancy agreement. “She’s got everything she needs to absolutely nail this guy to the wall,” Rooke said.

That sentiment aligns with what housing solicitors would tell any tenant in Demi’s position: you cannot simply be told to leave. Even if the landlord intends to move a family member in, proper notice procedures must be followed — and until then, the tenant retains the legal right to occupy the property.

When “my property” meets “the rule of law”

Many landlords, especially accidental or informal ones, believe that ownership entitles them to reclaim their property at will. In legal reality, however, a tenancy is a form of property right in itself.

Once a tenancy agreement is signed, the tenant gains “exclusive possession” of the premises for the duration of the contract. That means even the owner cannot enter, harass, or evict the tenant without following statutory procedures.

Under the Housing Act 1988 (for England and Wales), the two most common tenancy types are:

• Assured Shorthold Tenancies (ASTs): typically used for private rentals; landlords must give at least two months’ notice under a Section 21 notice (soon to be abolished under new reforms) or demonstrate a valid reason for eviction under Section 8.
   
• Assured Tenancies: offering stronger protection; the landlord can only evict for specific legal grounds, such as rent arrears or breach of agreement.
   

In either case, a landlord cannot force a tenant to leave before the notice period ends or without a court order. Changing locks or removing belongings would constitute an illegal eviction, a criminal offence under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977.

Illegal eviction: what the law says

An illegal eviction occurs when a landlord or their agent:

• Forces or threatens the tenant to leave without proper notice;
   
• Changes locks or cuts off utilities to drive the tenant out;
   
• Enters the property without consent to remove possessions.
   

Such behaviour can be prosecuted. Local councils have Housing Enforcement Teams empowered to take legal action, and tenants can claim damages through the civil courts for loss of quiet enjoyment, emotional distress, and temporary accommodation costs.

Courts take these cases seriously. In R v Akhtar (2010), a landlord who unlawfully evicted tenants and changed locks was sentenced to imprisonment, illustrating that “my property” is not a defence when tenants have lawful possession.

‘Friendship’ does not replace formality

Part of what made Demi’s story viral was the landlord’s casual tone. The two were reportedly friends before the dispute — a reminder that personal relationships can blur legal boundaries.

In many informal tenancies, contracts are incomplete or verbal. Yet even without a written agreement, the law still implies a tenancy once rent is accepted. A landlord who decides to “end things early” must still follow statutory eviction procedures, no matter how friendly the initial arrangement seemed.

Lawyers often warn: “If you wouldn’t end a job with a text, don’t end a tenancy with one.” Proper documentation protects both parties — especially when disputes escalate.

Tenancy rights during fixed terms

If, like Demi, a tenant is halfway through a fixed-term tenancy, the landlord’s options are limited.

To legally end the agreement early, the landlord would need:

• A break clause in the contract allowing early termination; or
   
• The tenant’s written consent to a surrender of the tenancy.
   

Otherwise, the tenancy continues until the end of the fixed term. Attempting to remove the tenant before that point — even for reasons like moving a relative in — would breach contract law.

Courts have upheld tenants’ rights even where landlords cite personal hardship. In Notting Hill Housing Trust v Roomus (2010), the court reaffirmed that landlords cannot bypass due process based on “personal preference or convenience.”

“Changing the locks” — a red flag phrase

The landlord’s threat to “change the locks” is particularly serious. Under section 1 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977, doing so without a possession order is a criminal offence punishable by fines or imprisonment.

If this happens, the tenant is entitled to regain entry — even by calling a locksmith or the police. Courts consistently rule that a tenant has the right to re-enter a property from which they’ve been unlawfully excluded.

As housing expert Jack Rooke noted, Demi could “absolutely go to court for an illegal eviction” if her landlord followed through. She might also claim compensation for breach of contract and for loss of amenity under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Lessons for landlords

For landlords, this case should serve as a warning. Emotional decisions, no matter how justified they feel, must never override procedure.

If a landlord genuinely needs a property back — whether for sale, renovation, or family use — there are lawful routes:

• Serve the correct form of notice (usually Section 21 or 8);
   
• Wait out the statutory notice period;
   
• Apply to court for possession if the tenant does not leave.
   

Skipping any of these steps risks not only court costs but criminal prosecution. It may also lead to reputational harm — as this case shows, digital outrage spreads faster than legal letters.

What tenants should do if threatened with eviction

If you receive sudden demands to vacate, don’t panic — but act quickly.

• Check your tenancy agreement to confirm your term, notice period, and any break clauses.
   
• Do not leave voluntarily unless you’ve agreed to a mutual surrender in writing. Leaving early can forfeit deposit protection and your right to claim damages.
   
• Contact your local council’s tenancy relations officer or a solicitor specialising in housing law. They can intervene and issue warnings to landlords engaging in harassment.
   
• Document all communications. Keep screenshots, texts, and any evidence of threats — they can be crucial in proving illegal eviction or harassment.
   

If you’ve been locked out, you can apply for an injunction to regain access and claim damages.

The bigger picture: housing stress and legal literacy

The incident reflects a broader tension in the rental market. Rising demand and limited supply have fuelled a sense of power imbalance, with some landlords taking shortcuts while tenants face insecurity.

In the UK, over 4.6 million households now rent privately. Despite reforms like the upcoming Renters (Reform) Bill, many tenants remain unaware of their rights — and many landlords unaware of their obligations.

Misunderstandings like “my house, my rules” persist partly because housing law is fragmented across multiple Acts, local regulations, and case law. This complexity creates fertile ground for misinformation — and viral disputes like Demi’s.

The legal bottom line

Property ownership confers rights — but also responsibilities. A tenancy transfers certain rights of possession to the tenant, and until those rights expire or are lawfully terminated, the landlord’s control is limited.

As courts have repeatedly stated, “ownership does not equal occupation.” Once a lease is granted, the tenant becomes a lawful occupier. Any attempt to override that through force, intimidation, or threats violates both civil and criminal law.

In summary:
 Demi’s story isn’t just an internet drama — it’s a textbook example of unlawful eviction and why tenancy law exists. Whether in Sydney or Sheffield, the rule is the same: a landlord’s ownership ends at the tenant’s front door until the law says otherwise.

Contact Us Now

Related Reading:

How to Invest Under the UK’s New Property Fault Line

ToLATA Claims Solicitors

What’s Happening With UK House Prices? Latest Market Moves and 2025 Forecasts