Session 2023-24
Renters (Reform) Bill
Written evidence submitted by Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance to the Renters (Reform) Public Bill Committee (RRB12)
Submission from: the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance (DAHA), on behalf of the DAHA-led National Housing and Domestic Abuse Policy and Practice Group
Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance : DAHA are an alliance of over 150 members with a shared vision for a future where every victim/survivor can choose a home where they are safe and live free from domestic abuse. Together, we are on a mission to improve the housing sector’s response to domestic abuse.
National Housing and Domestic Abuse Policy and Practice Group ("the Group") is led by the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance (DAHA) and brings together experts from the housing, domestic abuse, and violence against women and girls’ (VAWG) sectors from commissioning, charity, and policy perspectives. We support statutory agencies, government departments, and the private sector to deliver safe and suitable housing for survivors of domestic abuse. The list of our Group Members can be found here .
Executive summary
· DAHA , on behalf of the Group welcome the Renters (Reform Bill) and the end of section 21 evictions. However, we are concerned that delays to the implementation of the ban on section 21 evictions due to court reform will continue to put vulnerable tenants at risk of homelessness and harm.
· We are also concerned that changes to possession grounds for Ground 14 (antisocial behaviour) and Ground 8A (repeated rent arrears), will put tenants who experience domestic abuse at a higher risk of eviction and homelessness.
· Our recommendations regarding Ground 14 include:
o Eliminate the proposed changes to the definition of Ground 14 to "capable of causing" instead of "likely to cause"
o An amendment to Ground 14 should be introduced to clarify that antisocial behaviour caused by domestic abuse should not lead to eviction under Ground 14.
o An amendment to Ground 14 should require landlords and managing agents to follow a pre-eviction protocol to ensure that claims of antisocial behaviour have been investigated and where a potential link to domestic abuse is identified, victims have been offered support including referrals to domestic abuse services.
o Secondary legislation needs to introduce clear guidance for landlords, managing agents and judges to enable them to identify domestic abuse linked with antisocial behaviour reports.
· We recommend that Ground 8A be removed
1. The Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance (DAHA) and the Group welcome the Renters (Reform) Bill and in particular the end of Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions, as well as the commitment to bring forward legislation to apply the Decent Homes Standard in the private rented sector (PRS), to address discrimination against tenants in receipt of benefits or with children, and to strengthen local councils’ enforcement powers.
2. However, we want to draw the Committee members’ attention to the risk of delaying the end of section 21 evictions, as well as the unintended consequences that some parts of the Bill are likely to have on private renters who experience domestic abuse, in particular regarding the proposed changes to the grounds for possession for antisocial behaviour (ASB, Ground 14) and repeated rent arrears (Ground 8A).
Delays to implementing the end of section 21 evictions
3. Further delays in implementing the end of section 21 "no-fault" evictions will have real and serious implications for victims of domestic abuse and for local authorities:
- Survivors of domestic abuse who rent privately can be seriously impacted the use of section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions from their landlords, which can leave them at risk of homelessness and prevents them from recovering from the trauma they have experienced. The impacts can include a risk of a return to the perpetrator and on-going abuse that is likely to escalate in frequency and severity, increasing risk of serious harm or homicide, and serious impacts on mental health leading to serious harm including suicide. The Government themselves have identified the link between suicide and domestic abuse in their Suicide Prevention Strategy published in September 2023.
A case study highlighting this issue was provided by one of our members:
Kimberley (not her real name) had lived in a privately rented property with her husband and young child for a number of years, the tenancy was in her sole name as she had lived there prior to the marriage.
Following a serious assault and threats to kill by the husband, he left the property and bail conditions prevented him from returning. The landlord refused to change the locks to the property and Kimberley was forced to arrange for this to be done and paid for herself.
The property suffered from extensive mould and damp, which exacerbated her child’s asthma, in addition the property experienced recurrent mice infestations. These were reported to the landlord, who refused to do any repairs. The local authority issued the landlord with an improvement notice, upon receipt of which he issued Kimberley with a s21 notice.
Kimberley faced the stress of being made homeless with a young child, through no fault of her own, on top of the ongoing stress caused by upcoming court case for the domestic abuse. Due to economic abuse Kimberley was unable to rent another privately rented property without a guarantor. She felt ashamed of her situation and did not share this with family or friends.
The outcome of the situation was that Kimberley took an overdose, as she could see no other way out. Fortunately, she was discovered in time and survived the attempt and help was put in place.
- In January 2023 the leading Housing publication "Inside Housing" reported that "Pembrokeshire County Council said its projections for 2022-23 showed that 492 people will present as homeless as a result of being issued with a Section 21 notice. This is a 90% increase on the previous year, when 258 were evicted" going on to report "The total number of homeless presentations have also increased significantly, with mid-year estimates confirming a 79% increase in a five-year period. As of March 2022, Pembrokeshire Council had 418 people in temporary accommodation, a 435% increase from the same month in 2019." and told us that "The surge in no-fault evictions is partly down to .... anticipation of the impact that new Welsh rental reforms might have on the sector, the local authority said "
- Today (9.11.21) colleagues at Crisis shared n ew figures that show that 8,747 people in England and Wales were served with a Section 21 or a ‘no-fault’ eviction notice – which is a 32% increase (an increase of 2,131 households) from this time last year. So we are seeing the same pattern that we saw in Wales where landlords are rapidly serving no-fault e viction notices in anticipation of the Renters (R eform ) Bill. The impact on the most vulnerable citizens in society is enormously negative , for some, catastrophic . This i nclud es victims of domestic abuse and their children who have already, often, fled their homes once and now must find a new home for themselves and their children – possibly uprooting them from their schools and support networks . The impact on local authorities – many of whom are already buckling both financially and with thread bare resources – will be dangerous and counter-intuitive for the government.
- We heard in the 2 nd Reading Debate that there are concerns that the private rental sector will constrict without the option of no-fa ult evictions. We draw the Committee’s attention to the research by the Social Market Foundation which found little evidence of a negative impact on the private rental market across several countries and continents. We would highlight:
"The Scottish Parliament effectively banned no-fault evictions in 2017, yet its private rented sector grew at a faster rate between March 2018 and March 2020 than England’s. The two had been following similar trends up to that point. This is especially striking as Scotland’s ban on no-fault evictions occurred at the same time as large-scale protections for renters were introduced. [ii] "
And where
Gideon
Salutin
, SMF Researcher, said:
"The argument that the rental sector will contract under regulations which protect renters is based on faulty economics which
ignore
the role renters play in the market."
"There appears to be no correlation between an increase in rental protections and a decrease in rental properties. In fact, the opposite may be true, as stronger protections attract more renters, increasing demand and normalising renting over the long term."
Amendments of Ground 14 (anti-social behaviour)
4. Victims and survivors of domestic abuse are more likely than other tenants to have ASB complaints made against them, often due to the perpetrator’s abusive behaviour which can be disruptive to the neighbours. A study from a Housing Association in Wales found that tenants experiencing domestic abuse were four times more likely to have ASB complaints made against them [1] . This includes noise nuisance such as loud arguments and shouting, banging noise from violent assaults, aggressive and intimidating behaviour, substance misuse and associated nuisance significantly impacting neighbours and the local community.
5. We are grateful to Lloyd Russell-Moyle, MP, for highlighting this issue during the second reading of the Bill, citing that one of his constituents was evicted because "her husband was beating her too loudly". In his response, The Secretary of State asserted that he did not believe this case "would count as antisocial behaviour under our proposals, but we need to ensure that we are clear about what constitutes antisocial behaviour liable to lead to eviction". Numerous domestic homicide reviews (DHRs) unfortunately, tell us a different story with domestic abuse too frequently being mis-identified as anti-social behaviour with catastrophic outcomes as this case study shows:
A Case Study can be seen here is just one example of many DHRs that identify anti-social behaviour as an opportunity to identify domestic abuse and provide a safe intervention to prevent serious harm. The review into the homicide of "Victim M" in Leeds identified "a large number of calls by neighbours to the Anti-Social Behaviour Team for noise nuisance. Neighbours also described how they had heard the victim asking the male not to hurt her in at least one report " and concluded that " Reports of anti-social behaviour or noise disturbances for example could present a chance to ask about domestic violence and abuse"
We are aware that landlords are threatening vulnerable tenants, including those who are victims of domestic abuse which lead to the complaint of ASB, with eviction frequently because they do not have a clear definition of ASB, because they do not use professional curiosity to look to the cause of the [noise], or because they do not have the skills, tools or knowledge required to identify when the ASB is caused by/rooted in the behaviour of a perpetrator of domestic abuse (who may, or may not be a tenant).
We are therefore concerned that the Secretary of State’s response does not recognise that there is currently nothing in the Bill that indicates any differentiation between abusive behaviour in the context of domestic abuse which also causes nuisance to neighbours, and anti-social behaviour which is not linked to domestic abuse.
6. We strongly recommend that Government provides a new clear definition of anti-social behaviour within the Bill. Anti-social behaviour is currently defined as 'Conduct that has caused or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person' (Section 105(4) of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014). This definition of ASB is open to interpretation based on personal tolerance and perceptions that may not recognise when the ASB is rooted in domestic abuse and treated as the perpetrator of ASB is in fact the victim of domestic abuse. The definition must be accompanied by detailed advice on structured discretion that landlords can expect from judges and should include a clear differentiation between ASB and domestic abuse.
7. The Bill’s proposed amendments of Ground 14 replacing the words "likely to cause" for "capable of causing" anti-social behaviour will lower the threshold for evictions based on anti-social behaviour, without introducing any safeguard or protection for victims of domestic abuse. Domestic abuse-related noise and behaviour are, we would suggest, always "capable" of causing nuisance and annoyance to neighbours (see para. 4. above), and under the proposed changes we are concerned that victims of domestic abuse will be at greater risk of eviction under Ground 14.
8. A Domestic Homicide Review following the tragic murder of a mum of four by her husband found that neighbours had reported noise nuisance from the property on multiple occasions, however the professionals involved missed these vital opportunities to safeguard and support the victim despite clear signs that the noise was linked with domestic abuse [2] .
9. Victims of domestic abuse are often held responsible for the anti-social behaviour caused by their perpetrator, for example they are often accused of "letting" their abuser(s) back into the property. This fails to recognise and acknowledge the dynamics of coercive control, where the perpetrator controls their victim’s behaviour through fear, threat or intimidation. Coercive control is included in the statutory definition of domestic abuse (Domestic Abuse Act 2021) and housing professionals and landlords need to receive appropriate guidance and training to understand the dynamics of domestic abuse and how to safely respond when their tenants are at serious risk of harm. In one DHR (no longer available to view but relating to the murder of a woman in Bexhill on Sea) we heard how neighbours made complaints regarding noise of an ex-partner knocking on the victim’s door in the night. The landlord wrote to the victim (the tenant) threatening eviction on more than one occasion following similar complaints, so missing opportunities for the landlord to talk to the victim and enable a disclosure of the abuse. Less than a month after receiving one such letter the victim was murdered by the perpetrator whom she so feared.
10. We want to highlight that an increasing number of victims and survivors of domestic abuse are placed in the PRS after leaving their abuser(s) due to a chronic lack of social housing, however, private landlords and managing agents do not have the same training and knowledge about domestic abuse as social landlords do. There is therefore a serious risk that private landlords and managing agents will not recognise ASB complaints as potential indicators of domestic abuse and will proceed with eviction proceedings without investigating the situation and referring to specialist services who can offer support to potential victim. The Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance (DAHA) are currently working to address this through the development of an accreditation framework for PRS landlords to include advice, guidance and training to identify domestic abuse early and respond effectively and safely within the context of a coordinated community response (CCR)
11. We are concerned by the proposal to shorten the notice period for anti-social behaviour possession ground to only two weeks as this will prevent professionals involved from having sufficient time to investigate each situation and put in place appropriate safeguarding measures when the antisocial behaviour is linked to domestic abuse in the property. It also increases the likely serious negative impacts on survivors of domestic abuse as highlighted in paragraph 3 above. The notice period should align with Local Authorities’ homelessness prevention duty of 56 days to provide enough time for victims / survivors to seek advice and access support, as well as gathering evidence to successfully defend possession.
12. Our recommendations regarding Ground 14 include:
· The proposed changes to the definition of Ground 14 to "capable of causing" instead of "likely to cause" should be removed.
· An amendment to Ground 14 should be introduced to clarify that anti-social behaviour caused as a result of the behaviour of a perpetrator of domestic abuse should not lead to eviction under Ground 14.
· An amendment to Ground 14 should require landlords and managing agents to follow a pre-eviction protocol to ensure that complaints of antisocial behaviour have been investigated and where a potential link to domestic abuse is identified, victims have been offered support and guidance including referrals to domestic abuse services.
· Government should provide a clear definition of anti-social behaviour within the Bill, as well as guidance on structured discretion that landlords can expect from judges, and guidance for landlords, managing agents and judges to enable them to identify domestic abuse linked with antisocial behaviour reports.
· An amendment to the notice period for Ground 14 should be made to align it with the Local Authorities’ homelessness prevention duty of 56 days.
New ground 8A for possession (repeated rent arrears)
13. The new mandatory Ground 8A will directly impact victims of domestic abuse who are more likely to accumulate rent arrears due to economic abuse and due to the economic impact of fleeing domestic abuse [3] . Economic abuse is a form of domestic abuse included in the statutory definition of domestic abuse (Domestic Abuse Act 2021), it directly impacts victims’ ability to afford rent and other necessary living expenses.
A case study provided by Pride of Romani, a community organisation in Cheshire, highlights this issue: the survivor had a private tenancy in her name, however her abusive partner caused serious damage to the property, smashing windows and doors and causing antisocial behaviour on multiple occasions. He moved in with her without paying rent, and over the years of abuse she started to build considerable rent arrears which led the landlord to seek eviction in court without offering any kind of help or referral to support services. This eviction impacted her future housing situation as other landlords including private and social landlords would ask about previous evictions and rent arrears.
14. This example which is representative of many cases that domestic abuse services see daily shows the need to provide more flexibility, support and consideration of personal circumstances when dealing with rent arrears. The new proposed Ground 8A should be removed as it is mandatory and does not allow judges the opportunity to consider the individual circumstances that led to the arrears building up over time. There is already a discretionary ground for possession due to rent arrears (Section 8 Ground 10) that allows landlords to seek possession for repeated rent arrears, so adding a new ground is not necessary. Where the arrears were linked to domestic abuse, possession should not be granted.
15. The suggested Ground 8A raises concerns that the three separate occasions of repeated rent arrears are counted over a period of three years. This is highly problematic because research has shown that victims of domestic abuse suffer on average three years of abuse before getting effective help [4] . This means that victims of domestic abuse and their children are unlikely to receive appropriate support before facing eviction procedures, which will increase their risk of homelessness.
16. Our recommendations regarding Ground 8A include:
· Removal of the new Ground 8A. Where possession under section 8 ground 10 is sought due to rent arrears, the Bill should specify that where rent arrears are linked with the tenant experiencing domestic abuse, possession should not be granted.
· Any possession grounds for rent arrears should require landlords and managing agents to follow a pre-eviction protocol to ensure that repeated rent arrears have been investigated and where a potential link to domestic abuse is identified and victims have been offered support including referrals to domestic abuse services.
· Secondary legislation needs to introduce clear guidance for landlords, managing agents and judges to enable them to identify domestic abuse linked with rent arrears.
Submitted by DAHA for and on behalf of the DAHA-led National Housing & Domestic Abuse Policy & Practice Group 9 November 2023
November 2023.
[1] Jackson (2013), cited by Henderson, K. (2019) p.60. The role of housing in a coordinated community response to domestic abuse, Durham theses, Durham University. Available from: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/13087/
[1] and Gentoo & SafeLives. Safe at Home: The case for a response to domestic abuse by housing providers (2018). https://safelives.org.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Safe%20at%20Home%20Report.pdf
[2] Yorkshire Evening Post (2019), covering the DHR of Sinead Wooding "Teresa" published by Leeds CSP https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/crime/leeds-mum-killed-controlling-husband-planned-leave-him-review-findings-2516991
[3] Gentoo & SafeLives. Safe at Home: The case for a response to domestic abuse by housing providers (2018), p.36-37. https://safelives.org.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Safe%20at%20Home%20Report.pdf
[4] SafeLives, 2015. Professionals miss five opportunities to stop domestic violence, says SafeLives. https://safelives.org.uk/node/506