The Evolving Landscape of Housing Disrepair: Insights, Challenges, and Opportunities for Landlords

Forward?

In 2016, I attended a conference on disrepair and heard tales of woe from my counterparts in London and the Midlands. Claims farmers were going door to door in council estates, and Liverpool, Manchester and London based no-win no-fees were targeting council tenants further and further afield. Other than a few coming through the door in Bristol, my colleagues in the Westcountry had not had even a whiff of a claim. In any case, I headed the warning, took my notes, and saved them for a rainy day. That day did not come until three years later, when we received our first disrepair claim. The first of the 2019 claims did not reach court until 2023 and 2024, respectively. Fortunately for us, both settled in the Council’s favour. Unfortunately for the claimants, this left them bearing costs of nearly ￡10000 and ￡5000, respectively, to cover our costs. In the former case, the tenant was left with a CCJ for this amount, but due to a combination of dyslexia and poor communication from their solicitor, they did not even realise that this was the case. ?

We have seen that claims have steadily been increasing, and whilst the majority appear to be false, spurious, or not actionable, they are time-consuming and costly to defend. Networking with other landlords on the issue has been invaluable and successful practice seen elsewhere has been brought into our standard procedure with positive outcomes. ?

Although promising talk of fixed costs for disrepair gave a glimmer of hope, progress seems to have faltered. The Churchill vs Merthyr Tydfill case has offered some positive progress, though it is yet to be seen how exactly this may be applied in the types of disrepair claims we see. Fortunately, this ties in well with a recent push from the Regulator for Social Housing and the Housing Ombudsman Service on improved complaints handling across the sector. ?

As a smaller housing provider, with just less than 3000 homes, networking with other landlords has been crucial to protecting Housing Rent Account revenue. As a believer in good record keeping and data collection, I have been tracking claims, costs, and outcomes since the first claim. What we have been lacking, however, is a benchmark to compare our performance. Even in cases where I have a known about other housing providers’ figures, they do not always mean a lot, as they can be influenced by so many other factors. Without a benchmark, how do we know whether what we are doing is working, or not? This led to a new project, which commenced in October 2024, to start collecting data from council housing providers across the UK. Due to differences in legislation, this report focusses on English councils.?

Introduction to the report?

?This report examines trends in housing disrepair claims across UK councils, analysing data collected through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. Around 70 stock-owning Councils responded to the request for information. The study considers multiple factors influencing disrepair claims, including stock size, geographic location, urban versus rural settings, and the socio-economic context of tenants. Additionally, it accounts for the impacts of key legislative and societal events, such as the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the 2019 Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act. There are several limitations and exclusions, which are noted at the end. ?

The data is anonymised, and most figures non-specific. You may note that financial figures and numbers of claims are removed from graphs. This is partly to protect struggling councils from being further targeted by unscrupulous claims farmers and to save the full report as added value to encourage councils and housing associations to share their data to support the project. The longer-term aim is to share more detailed information with those who have contributed to the data, and to offer to include housing associations where they are willing to share their own data. ?

The main purpose of the data collection project and subsequent report is to breakdown performance into ‘per 1000 homes’ figures, to draw some more meaningful conclusions, and identify more reliable trends. ?

1. Overview Housing Disrepair Claims?

?What Are Disrepair Claims??

?Disrepair claims arise when tenants take legal action against their landlords, alleging failure to maintain properties to a legally acceptable standard. These claims are governed by the pre-action protocol for housing disrepair, which aims to resolve issues without court proceedings. If claims are proven, tenants may be entitled to compensation for personal inconvenience, damage to belongings, or adverse effects on health.?

Key Legislative and Societal Influences?

It is important to note that a significant feature in disrepair claims, especially post 2018, relate all or in part to claims of damp and mould. Unlike most other area of disrepair, it is one of the most difficult to demonstrate causation, actionability and responsibility.?

• Grenfell Tower Tragedy and Fire Safety Act: The Grenfell tragedy increased scrutiny on social housing conditions, forcing landlords to prioritise safety and quality. Increased budget has been redirected to meet the new requirements of the Fire Safety Act, which further detracts from ongoing maintenance and capital budgets. ?

• COVID-19 Pandemic: The pandemic disrupted routine maintenance and repairs, with councils diverting resources to emergency repairs and tenant welfare. This left significant backlogs of works, at a time when wear and tear on homes was at its highest. Mental health seems to have taken a plummet around this time, impacting on both repairs and tenancy management resources. Whilst repairs teams still working during the pandemic were applauded, this recognition of their dedication was soon forgotten. ?

• 2019 Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act: This legislation empowered tenants to take legal action for substandard housing, raising awareness of disrepair claims, widening the scope of disrepair claims and increasing the subjectivity of habitability. It also introduced a greater focus on the presence of damp and mould, rather than the defects which might or might not be causing it. ?

• 2021 Housing Ombudsman Report ‘It’s Not Lifestyle’: The ‘It’s Not Lifestyle’ report exposed systemic failures in how landlords address damp and mould complaints, particularly a tendency to blame tenants’ "lifestyle choices" rather than tackling structural issues. The report raised tenant awareness of their rights and responsibilities, leading to increased formal complaints and legal claims. Claims farming organisations used the report to highlight housing management failings, further driving disrepair claims. For councils, this resulted in operational strain, as they were forced to reassess complaint-handling practices while addressing rising complaints and claims.?

• 2023 – media coverage of the death of 2-Year-Old Awaab Ishak: Although he died in December 2020, it was not until after the coroner's inquest, that the tragic death of two-year-old Awaab Ishak came to the forefront. His death, caused by prolonged exposure to damp and mould, highlighted the life-threatening consequences of inadequate housing conditions and unresponsive landlords. Extensive media coverage prompted a surge in tenant complaints and claims, particularly around damp and mould, as tenants recognised the potential risks. Claims farming organisations amplified the case to attract more clients, contributing to a sharp rise in disrepair claims. Councils faced increased scrutiny and financial risk, with many prioritising settlements to avoid legal escalation or reputational damage.?

2. Stock Size and Its Impact on Disrepair Claims?

The size of a council’s housing stock is one of the most significant factors in the number of claims received, as in its ability to manage repairs, respond to tenant needs, and defend against disrepair claims.?

Key Observations by Stock Size?

• Councils with Fewer than 100 Homes? Councils in this category consistently reported no disrepair claims. Several factors may explain this:?

• Smaller stock size allows for closer oversight and proactive maintenance.?

• Tenants in rural or smaller areas may have less awareness of claims processes or legal rights.?

• Relationships between tenants and landlords are often more direct, reducing disputes.?

• Councils with 100–1000 Properties? While claims were still minimal, average compensation amounts tended to be higher for isolated cases. This may be due to the severity of individual issues in councils with limited maintenance budgets or reactive strategies.?

• Councils with 1000–3000 Properties? Medium-sized portfolios experienced moderate claims activity. These councils often benefit from more balanced resources, allowing for better claim management compared to larger counterparts.?

• Councils with 3000–5000 Properties? This category showed a notable increase in both claim volume and compensation amounts, especially in later years. These councils face challenges balancing repair budgets with growing legal costs.?

• Councils with 5000–10,000 Properties? Councils in this range consistently reported high claims volumes and increasing compensation. Stock in this category often includes a mix of urban and rural housing types, creating diverse challenges.?

• Councils with Over 10,000 Properties? The highest claims volumes were reported by councils with the largest housing stock. Many of these councils manage older housing portfolios, particularly in urban areas, which are more susceptible to disrepair issues and targeted by claims farming organisations. Councils with over 20,000 properties struggled to even provide a response to?the number of claims they were handling.?

3. Trends Over Time – Claims Received?

Councils across all stock sizes have reported an increase in both claims and average compensation amounts. This trend reflects growing tenant awareness of rights, the influence of claims farming organisations, and operational challenges in housing management.?

Year-on-Year Increases in Claims ?

The data shows a significant increase in the number of claims received by councils over the six years from 2018-19 to 2023-24, with the most dramatic rises occurring after 2021. Below is a year-by-year analysis of the trend:?

2018-19 to 2019-20:? The average number of claims increased from 6 to 8, representing a 33% rise. This may reflect the early impact of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2019, which gave tenants greater legal recourse to challenge disrepair issues.?

2019-20 to 2020-21:? The average claims dropped slightly, from 8 to 7 (12.5% decrease). This decrease may be attributed to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted access for inspections and repairs, delaying claims.?

2020-21 to 2021-22:? Claims rose sharply from 7 to 13, a 85.7% increase, likely driven by increased tenant awareness following the publication of the Housing Ombudsman’s “It’s Not Lifestyle” report. This report empowered tenants to push back against the narrative of tenant lifestyle being the root cause of damp and mould issues.?

2021-22 to 2022-23:? The average number of claims nearly doubled, rising from 13 to 25, a 92.3% increase. This coincides with growing media coverage of disrepair issues and the increased involvement of claims management companies targeting vulnerable tenants.?

2022-23 to 2023-24:? The rise in claims slowed slightly, increasing from 25 to 28, a 12% rise, reflecting the sustained impact of media scrutiny and tenant empowerment campaigns, particularly after the 2023 coverage of Awaab Ishak’s death.?

Overall Trend:?

Over the six-year period, the average number of claims increased from 6 to 28, a staggering 366.7% increase. This demonstrates the growing pressures faced by councils to address disrepair claims, particularly as tenants and legal representatives become more proactive in pursuing compensation.?

4. Trends over time – Settlement?

Trends in settlement vs. being closed or going dormant?

The average settlement percentage across all years (in either favour) is approximately 21.57%.?

• Overall Settlement Rate:? Settlement percentages range from 15% to 29%, with an average settlement rate of approximately 21.57% across the six years.?

• Peak Settlement Rate:? The highest settlement rate was 28.71% in 2020-21, likely reflecting increased legal activity as COVID-19 restrictions eased.?

• Recent Trend:? Although claims received have increased significantly (from 6 in 2018-19 to 28 in 2023-24), the proportion of claims settled has not risen at the same pace, suggesting delays or challenges in processing claims, defending cases, or tenants dropping claims before resolution.?

This analysis underscores the importance of improving claim-handling processes and understanding the factors influencing why many claims remain unresolved or unrecorded as "settled."?

Our experience shows that the majority of disrepair claims go "dormant," where the claimant's solicitor ceases communication, leaving the claim unresolved. Often, tenants are unaware that their claim has stalled and believe their case is still being pursued. This misunderstanding can lead to continued refusal of access for necessary repair works, further delaying resolutions.?

This lack of progress damages the tenant-landlord relationship, fostering mistrust and frustration. Tenants frequently feel unsupported and unsure of the status of their claim, creating a sense of being "left in limbo." Meanwhile, landlords face the challenge of trying to address repairs and engage with tenants who may have lost confidence in their ability to resolve the issues.?

Efforts to address this dynamic should include better communication, proactive follow-ups, and ensuring tenants are fully informed about the status of their claim and any steps they can take to resolve their housing issues.?

Trends in Claims Settling in Claimants' Favour?

The percentage of claims settling in the claimant's favour has also increased steadily, reflecting either stronger tenant cases or a shift towards early settlements to avoid protracted legal costs.?

2018-19: 1 of 6 claims settled in favour of the claimant (16.7%).?

2019-20: 2 of 8 claims settled in favour of the claimant (25%), a 50% increase in the percentage compared to the previous year.?

2020-21: 2 of 7 claims settled in favour of the claimant (28.6%), a 14.3% increase in the percentage from the prior year.?

2021-22: 3 of 13 claims settled in favour of the claimant (23.1%), a slight decrease in percentage (-19.2%), potentially due to councils defending more claims.?

2022-23: 5 of 25 claims settled in favour of the claimant (20%), another decrease in percentage (-13.4%). This may reflect councils adopting more robust case-by-case defences.?

2023-24: 8 of 28 claims settled in favour of the claimant (28.6%), a 43% increase in the percentage compared to the previous year, possibly due to increased pressure from media scrutiny and claims farming activity.?

Overall Trend:?

While the percentage of claims settling in the claimant's favour fluctuates year-to-year, the overall trend shows an upward trajectory from 16.7% in 2018-19 to 28.6% in 2023-24, representing a 71.3% increase over six years. This indicates that claimants are either presenting stronger cases or councils are settling more claims to minimise legal expenses and reputational risk.?

5. Trends in Disrepair Claims: Settled in Claimants’ vs. Defendants’ Favour?

Analysis of the trends in disrepair claims settlements from 2018-19 to 2023-24 reveals important developments regarding how claims are being handled by landlords and tenants. Here's a breakdown of the trends and insights:?

Claims Settled in Claimants’ Favour?

Year-on-Year Growth: Claims settled in favour of claimants increased from 1 per council in 2018-19 to 3.81 in 2023-24, a 281% increase over the six years.?

This consistent rise highlights the growing success of tenant claims, driven by increased tenant awareness, media coverage (e.g., the Awaab Ishak case), and legal changes such as the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2019.?

Percentage Increases:?

• 2018-19 to 2019-20: 28% increase.?

• 2021-22 to 2022-23: 31% increase.?

• 2022-23 to 2023-24: 37% increase.?

Claims Settled in Defendants’ Favour?

Year-on-Year Growth: Settlements in defendants’ favour have also risen from 0.36 per council in 2018-19 to 1.45 in 2023-24, a 303% increase over the six years.?

However, the rise in defendant success appears to lag behind the claimant trend by about 2-3 years, indicating that landlords are gradually realising the importance of defending claims robustly, even to the extent of proceeding to court.?

Percentage Increases:?

• 2018-19 to 2019-20: 25% increase.?

• 2021-22 to 2022-23: 44% increase.?

• 2022-23 to 2023-24: 34% increase.?

Comparison of Trends?

• Claimant Success vs. Defendant Success:? Despite both trends showing growth, claimants still outpace defendants in settlements by more than 2.6 to 1 in 2023-24 (3.81 vs. 1.45). However, the data suggests a narrowing gap over time, indicating that landlords are becoming more strategic in defending claims.?

• Gradual Realisation by Landlords:? The increase in defendant successes suggests landlords are increasingly willing to take claims to court and defend themselves where they feel justified. This trend reflects a shift in council attitudes toward balancing tenant concerns with protecting public funds and reputation.?

Future Implications?

• Predictions for Defendant Success:? If landlords continue improving their record-keeping, inspection processes, and environmental monitoring (as seen with proactive councils), the success rate for claims settled in their favour is likely to increase further. This will be influenced by how councils adapt to responsibilities under Awaab’s Law, ensuring damp and mould issues are addressed systematically.??
• Tenant Claimant Dominance:? Nevertheless, tenant claimant successes are expected to remain dominant, especially in deprived areas (Core20), unless landlords demonstrate significant improvements in housing standards, early intervention, and proactive communication.?

This summary highlights that while landlords are slowly closing the gap, tenant claims remain more successful overall, indicating a need for continued improvement in council response, legal understanding, and compliance efforts.?

6. Trends in Compensation?

The data highlights year-on-year changes in compensation paid by councils across different housing stock sizes. Below is a breakdown of key figures and observations:?

• 2018-19 to 2019-20:? A sharp drop (-30.5%) in average compensation was observed. This could reflect councils focusing on early settlements or lower claims activity.?

• 2020-21:? Compensation rose by 27.4%, coinciding with the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to delayed repairs and growing tenant dissatisfaction.?

• 2021-22:? Compensation saw a smaller increase (+4.7%), reflecting the gradual recovery from pandemic-related delays but increased scrutiny due to reports like “It’s Not Lifestyle”.?

• 2022-23:? The highest year-on-year increase (+22.4%) occurred, likely due to heightened public awareness following the tragic death of Awaab Ishak and increased legal representation targeting vulnerable tenants.?

• 2023-24:? Compensation levels stabilised, with a smaller increase (+3.7%). This suggests councils are adopting more consistent strategies to manage claims, although rising tenant expectations and claims persistence remain key challenges.?

Graph Placeholders?

1. Stock Size vs. Claims Received: This graph will illustrate the correlation between stock size and claims received, highlighting the absence of claims in councils with under 100 homes.?

1. Stock Size vs. Average Compensation: A comparison of compensation amounts by stock size.?

7. The Courts vs The Housing Ombudsman Service?

The Housing Ombudsman Service’s performance data highlights differences in maladministration rates and compensation trends compared to the claims success rates you provided for councils. Here is a breakdown:?

Maladministration Rates?

• Maladministration or severe maladministration findings occurred in 49% of Housing Ombudsman cases nationally in 2022-23, with severe maladministration accounting for a smaller proportion. These rates vary depending on the type of landlord, with local authorities experiencing higher rates than housing associations ?

• In cases involving property conditions like damp and mould, maladministration findings were as high as 73% nationally.?

Compensation Ordered?

• On average, compensation awarded by the Housing Ombudsman for maladministration is between ￡150 and ￡2,000, depending on the severity of the issue and its impact on the tenant ?

• Compensation amounts often account for inconvenience, delays, or direct financial losses but are modest in comparison to court settlements or legal claims.?

Comparison with Disrepair Data?

Your council’s disrepair data shows an increasing success rate for claimants, rising from 17% in 2018-19 to 29% in 2023-24. In contrast, the Housing Ombudsman’s findings of maladministration remain significantly higher (around 49%).?

This suggests that courts might be more conservative in settling claims compared to the Housing Ombudsman, due to stricter evidence thresholds.?

The data suggests that a tenant is more likely to be successful if they approach the Housing Ombudsman Service, however compensation on average is lower than those ordered through the courts. The key factor, however, is that there is no risk to tenants associated with the Housing Ombudsman approach and the service will never ask a tenant to pay a landlord’s costs where a complaint is false, spurious, or vexatious. ?

8. Geographic and Rural vs Urban Trends?

Geographic Trends?

• Regional Variations:? Disrepair claims were more prevalent in urban councils, particularly in areas with higher levels of deprivation. Urban councils in the North and Midlands reported the highest claims activity, while rural councils in the South West generally reported lower levels of claims.?

• Councils in Core20 Areas:? Core20 areas, as defined by the NHS, are the 20% most deprived regions in England. These areas are more likely to experience higher claim volumes due to poorer housing conditions and increased tenant vulnerability to claims farming practices.?

Urban vs. Rural Differences?

Urban councils face unique challenges, including:?

• Older housing stock with greater repair needs.?

• Higher tenant awareness of legal rights and access to claims farming organisations.? In contrast, rural councils benefit from smaller, dispersed housing stock, often in better condition, with less frequent claims activity.?

Urban housing providers report an average of 25% more claims per property compared to their rural counterparts—demonstrating the strain of denser populations on property management

9. Socio-Economic Factors and Core20?

What is Core20??

Core20 refers to the most deprived 20% of the population in England, based on measures of deprivation outlined in the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). These areas are characterised by:?

• Higher levels of poverty and unemployment.?

• Poor health outcomes.?

• Increased reliance on social housing.?

• Limited access to public and private resources.?

Core20 areas are more likely to house vulnerable populations who are disproportionately affected by poor housing conditions. This makes them more susceptible to damp, mould, and disrepair issues, creating fertile ground for claims farmers and legal firms targeting compensation claims.?

Impact of Core20 on Disrepair Claims?

a. Housing Stock and Conditions?

• Properties in Core20 areas are often older, poorly insulated, and in greater need of maintenance and repairs.?

• Budget constraints in these areas mean councils face challenges in addressing maintenance backlogs, exacerbating disrepair issues.?

b. Council Resources?

• Councils managing stock in Core20 areas often operate with stretched budgets, prioritising urgent repairs over long-term preventative maintenance.?

• Increased claim volumes in Core20 areas strain resources further, making it difficult to respond effectively to tenant complaints or legal claims.?

c. Vulnerability to Claims Farmers?

• Deprivation increases tenant vulnerability to claims farming – the practice of third-party firms targeting tenants to pursue legal claims, often for profit.?

• Tenants in Core20 areas may lack awareness of the implications of pursuing claims, particularly where proactive landlord engagement could have resolved the issue.?

• Councils in these areas face increased financial exposure due to higher legal costs and compensation payments.?

d. Household Vulnerabilities?

• Tenants in Core20 areas are more likely to experience issues such as overcrowding, fuel poverty, and damp caused by condensation. These conditions make disrepair claims more likely.?

• Households in Core20 areas may also be less able to implement preventative measures, such as adequate ventilation, due to financial constraints.?

e. Settlement Approaches in Core20 vs Non-Core20 Areas?

• Councils in Core20 areas are more likely to settle claims early to minimise legal costs and avoid reputational damage.?

• Non-Core20 councils, with potentially newer or better-maintained housing stock, may take a firmer stance on defending claims.?

Deprivation is a key driver in claims frequency: properties in the most deprived areas see up to 35% more claims than those in more affluent neighbourhoods

10. Limitations ?

FOI Process?

• Data Quality and Limitations?

The data analysis is constrained by several limitations:??

• Partial Responses: Many councils provided incomplete information, especially for earlier years, due to gaps in historical record-keeping.??
• Non-Responsive Councils: A number of councils, particularly those managing 20,000+ properties, were unable to provide data within FOI cost limits. This suggests that some landlords lack a clear understanding of the scale of disrepair issues or have underdeveloped systems for tracking claims.??
• Variable Interpretations: Councils interpreted the FOI request differently, providing varying levels of detail based on their internal record-keeping practices. For example, some councils reported compensation values only for claims settled in court, while others included pre-court settlements.?

• Organisational Preparedness: Well-organised councils with robust data management systems provided comprehensive responses, while others demonstrated poor record-keeping, particularly in rural areas.?

• Exclusions: Housing associations were not included in this analysis, excluding areas where councils have transferred housing stock.?

The FOI process was impressive, with many councils demonstrating their commitment to transparency by responding within statutory timelines. This is a positive reflection on local government accountability. However, the lack of comprehensive historical data in some cases indicates a need for better data management practices.?

Administrative Approaches?

Councils reported varying strategies for managing claims:?

• Case-by-Case Handling: Most councils handle claims individually, balancing tenant needs and legal risks.?

• Firm Defence: A minority of councils adopt a firm approach to defend claims, aiming to discourage frivolous cases.?

• Early Settlement: Some councils prefer early settlement to minimise costs, even in defensible cases.?

11. Additional observations?

?Good practice and high performance:?

?I noted particularly good practice and/or performance from the following councils:?

• City of Lincoln – excellent record keeping and quality of data?

• North Kesteven District Council – they provided an excellent response to the request for information, self-reflecting on the fact that they were unable to provide the information in the requested format may have been an indicator that they should start keeping more comprehensive records. This shows a forward thinking and transparent approach.?

• Manchester City Council – seems to buck the trend of city councils struggling to keep a handle on claims, with comparatively modest numbers. ?

• Darlington Borough Council – they are outliers compared to councils with similar stock size. They just seem to say ‘no thank you’ to claims and settlement and carry out with the day job. Claims coming in are low, and claims settled in the claimants' favour are zero. There could be a number of factors, but a quick look at their website builds a picture of a well-organised, tenant-centric service.?

Largest payouts:?

2023-23 was the most significant year on average in relation to claimant costs and compensation, with one landlord paying out more than ￡1.3 million in compensation and claimant costs alone. ?

2023-24 saw a significantly higher investment in external costs (expert and legal), which led to a comparative reduction in claimant costs paid, suggesting a change in strategy. ?

Misunderstanding of Landlord’s rights to defend claims and claim costs back?

A few responses noted that it was not possible to provide a response to ‘claims settled in the defendants favour’ because the only two options are for claims to be settled in the favour of the claimant or would be closed/go dormant. The reality is that a landlord is fully entitled to defend a claim through to court and either settle or seek judgment in their own favour and claim their own costs back from the claimant. This is a crucial point, as without financial risk to unscrupulous non-win no-fee solicitors and to claimants themselves, claims will only ever increase, and there will be no incentive to use risk-free alternative dispute resolution.?

Other factors:?

Speaking with individual councils, there are a host of other factors influencing on disrepair performance. Age and type of stock is significant, with many councils struggling with pre-1900, non-traditional and high-rise stock. Equally, staffing issues play a significant part with high staff turnover having an impact on continuity of cases. ?

12. Conclusion and Recommendations?

This analysis highlights the complex and evolving nature of disrepair claims in social housing. Key trends include rising claims volumes, increasing settlements in tenants’ favour, and significant regional and stock size variations. External factors such as Grenfell, Covid-19, and legislative changes have played a major role in driving these trends, alongside ongoing challenges in managing older housing stock and addressing tenant concerns.?

Despite these insights, gaps in data availability and quality remain a barrier to fully understanding the scale and impact of disrepair claims across the UK. Councils must prioritise improving data collection and record-keeping systems to better track claims, identify problem areas, and implement proactive maintenance strategies. By doing so, housing providers can mitigate risks, enhance tenant satisfaction, and ensure compliance with evolving housing standards.?

?Key findings include:?

• Stock size is a critical determinant of claims activity, with larger councils experiencing greater challenges.?

• Geographic and socio-economic factors, particularly in Core20 areas, play a significant role in claim volumes and compensation trends.?

• Urban councils are disproportionately affected, facing higher tenant awareness and claims farming activity.?

• Improved record-keeping and proactive maintenance strategies are essential to address rising claims and operational challenges.?

Recommendations?

1. Standardised Record-Keeping: Councils should adopt consistent approaches to data collection and reporting to better understand and address disrepair trends.?

1. Proactive Maintenance: Investing in proactive repairs can reduce disrepair claims and improve tenant satisfaction.?

1. Tenant Education: Increasing tenant awareness about property use and maintenance responsibilities can help mitigate claims.?

1. Leveraging Technology: Investing in robust record-keeping systems, digital inspection reporting, and environmental monitoring tools can help landlords track property conditions, identify risks early, and provide evidence in disputes. These technologies improve efficiency, transparency, and the ability to proactively address disrepair issues, reducing successful claims.?

1. Legal Training: Councils should ensure staff understand the full scope of legal options, including the potential to successfully defend claims.?

1. Professional collaboration: Landlords, housing experts, and legal advisors should collaborate to share insights, best practices, and data. This approach ensures consistent handling of disrepair claims, promotes early interventions, and supports improved housing quality while reducing tenant dissatisfaction and potential legal risks.?

1. Dis-incentivising claims: This is more of a personal view, but I do feel that is important for there to be more risk for no-win no-claim firms and also for claimants. The powers the Housing Ombudsman has means that tenants have available to them a no-risk option to have complaints reviewed by an independent body already, so there is little need to utilise litigation. The Housing Ombudsman Service (HOS) has the authority to hold social landlords to account not just for performance against legislation, but their own policies. HOS awards are often much greater than those set out in court and much quicker. By being willing to pursue claimants and claimant solicitors for costs there is both a financial and reputational risk to them in pursuing spurious claims. ?

1. Lobbying for fixed costs: It has been discussed before; however, this does seem to be the only logical way to protect a tenant’s right to take a route through litigation, whilst protecting social landlords from the financial burden of unethical behaviour from claims farmers and unscrupulous no-win no-fee solicitors. ?

?