After investing £30,000 to transform a neglected council-owned garden, single mother Renata Mohamed faces possible eviction by Brighton and Hove City Council amid disputes over permissions and planning regulations, highlighting growing concerns over tenant protections and no-fault evictions in the city.
Renata Mohamed, a 48-year-old single mother, has found herself embroiled in a distressing dispute with Brighton and Hove City Council following a significant investment she made in transforming her council-owned garden. For 19 years, Renata resided in Birdham Road, Moulsecoomb, where the garden was a source of frustration and embarrassment. “When I moved in, the garden was unsafe, with uneven ground and a jungle of overgrown trees, weeds, and broken fences,” she recalled. The state of disrepair not only rendered the outdoor space unusable but also prevented her children from enjoying it, leading to feelings of inadequacy during their formative years.
After nearly two decades of pleading with the council for assistance—only to be told the responsibility lay with her—Renata finally took matters into her own hands. She invested £30,000 into a complete overhaul of the garden. The work included landscaping help from a friend’s business, which involved cutting back overgrown vegetation, erecting a new fence, levelling the ground, and installing a patio. Renata’s determination, fuelled by years of savings and forgoing holidays, was aimed at creating a space where her grandchildren could play and enjoy.
However, shortly after the transformation, Renata was approached by a council officer who instructed her to halt the work immediately. The officer indicated that Renata had failed to obtain the necessary permissions for the modifications. This demand has left her feeling bewildered and frustrated, especially as she claims to have repeatedly asked for clarifications regarding her responsibilities as a tenant. With English as her second language, having immigrated from Poland, Renata felt particularly disadvantaged in navigating the bureaucratic requirements.
In the aftermath of the council’s intervention, Renata asserts that she was misinformed by a council employee about the possibility of applying for retrospective permission, a claim the council has refuted. They cited assertions that drainage had not been appropriately installed, despite Renata providing photographic evidence to the contrary. The council has since communicated that the matter has been referred to the courts, threatening eviction as a potential drastic step.
Renata’s plight is not an isolated incident. Local reports illustrate a broader trend in which tenants, particularly vulnerable individuals, face eviction under increasingly precarious circumstances. Another notable case is that of Keziah Hall, also a single mother, who faced a no-fault eviction after years of tenancy. Such cases have drawn attention to the urgent need for reforms in renters’ rights. In a recent survey, it was revealed that 59 homes in Brighton and Hove were repossessed through no-fault evictions under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, a practice that allows landlords to evict tenants without cause. In response to rising concerns, the Labour government has pledged to abolish such evictions, reflecting a growing acknowledgment of the need for tenant protections.
Additionally, the situation in Brighton extends to the business community, with tenants in creative spaces like New England House facing eviction as councils pursue redevelopment under stringent safety regulations. The potential for community loss resonates deeply, as these spaces often provide essential services and cultural contributions to the area.
Renata’s experience highlights not only her individual struggle but also a systemic issue that many tenants face. “It’s such a cruel way to treat me,” she lamented. Her story serves as a poignant reminder of the precarious nature of housing security, particularly for those who strive to enhance their living conditions, yet find themselves ensnared in bureaucratic hurdles. As the council seeks a resolution, Renata’s hope remains that empathy and understanding will prevail, allowing her to enjoy the garden she fought so hard to create.
As the broader conversation about housing rights continues to evolve, it is clear that the plight of individual tenants—like Renata—must be central to any forthcoming discussions on reform and community investment.
Reference Map
- Paragraph 1: Sources [1], [2]
- Paragraph 2: Sources [1], [2]
- Paragraph 3: Sources [1], [2]
- Paragraph 4: Sources [1], [3]
- Paragraph 5: Source [4]
- Paragraph 6: Source [5]
- Paragraph 7: Sources [1], [2]
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/25170161.brighton-gran-evicted-30-000-garden-makeover/?ref=rss – Please view link – unable to able to access data
- https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/25170161.brighton-gran-evicted-30-000-garden-makeover/?ref=rss – Renata Mohamed, a 48-year-old single mother from Moulsecoomb, Brighton, spent £30,000 transforming her unsafe and overgrown council-owned garden into a usable space. After completing the work, Brighton and Hove City Council informed her that she needed authorization for the modifications. Despite her claims that council staff had previously stated it was her responsibility to maintain the garden, the council now insists on compliance with regulations. The council has referred the matter to the courts, considering eviction as a last resort, and is seeking a resolution to the issues created with the property.
- https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czdpvzd3d9vo – Keziah Hall, a single mother from Portslade, East Sussex, was evicted from her home of 16 years after receiving a no-fault eviction notice. Despite applying for numerous properties, she faced repeated rejections and was eventually placed in emergency accommodation by Brighton and Hove City Council, which she described as unsafe and unsuitable. Hall has called on the government to improve renters’ rights to prevent such experiences for others.
- https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2024/08/19/dozens-lose-home-through-no-fault-eviction-in-brighton-and-hove/ – In the year leading up to June 2024, 59 homes in Brighton and Hove were repossessed following ‘no-fault evictions’ under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988. This practice allows landlords to evict tenants without providing a reason. The Labour government has pledged to ban such evictions, and the Renters’ Rights Bill is expected to offer tenants greater protection in their homes.
- https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2025/03/14/tower-block-tenants-face-eviction-and-turn-to-council-for-help/ – Creative business owners in New England House, Brighton, are facing eviction as the council plans to take ‘vacant possession’ of the building by September 30, 2025. The council may need to spend up to £26 million to bring the building up to fire safety standards. Tenants are seeking alternative accommodation to continue their operations and are calling on the council for assistance.
- https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2010/06/01/brighton-guerrilla-gardeners-face-eviction/ – Activists behind the Lewes Road Community Garden in Brighton are facing eviction after transforming a derelict site into a vibrant community space. Initially, they had the site’s owner’s blessing, but plans for new tenants, including a Tesco supermarket, have led to legal proceedings to remove the gardeners. A campaign against the proposed Tesco store has garnered significant public support.
- https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/23641249.tennis-club-faces-eviction-make-way-luxury-homes-brighton/ – Badgers Tennis Club in Brighton faces eviction as the Chotai family plans to develop the land into luxury homes. The club, which has been a community asset, was previously at risk in 2018 but received public support to remain. This time, members are concerned about the outcome and are seeking ways to convince the landlords to allow them to stay.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative references recent events, including a 2024 survey on no-fault evictions and a 2025 case involving tenants in Brighton. There is no indication of recycled content or outdated references. The primary story about Renata Mohamed appears current as of early 2025. The lack of press release characteristics supports a high freshness score.
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
Several direct quotes from Renata Mohamed are present and appear original to the narrative, with no earlier public records or sources found online predating this coverage. Quotes about her garden state and feelings are unique to this report. This suggests the quotes are likely firsthand, increasing their authenticity.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative originates mainly from The Argus, a known local UK news provider focusing on Brighton and Hove. It is generally regarded as a reputable regional news outlet, providing reliable local reporting. Supplementary references cite Brighton and Hove News and BBC, both credible. This lends moderate to high source reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims about a tenant investing in a council garden and then facing eviction due to permission issues align with known bureaucratic and housing tenancy disputes in the UK. References to no-fault evictions and government reforms increase contextual plausibility. The situation described corresponds with documented housing challenges affecting vulnerable tenants.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is a fresh, first-run account of a current housing dispute involving a Brighton council tenant. Quotes appear original with no evidence of recycling, and the reporting comes from credible local and national news entities. The story is plausible within the known context of UK housing laws and policy debates, warranting a high confidence pass.
