Research into the implications of the Renting Homes Act 2016 for refuge accommodation

Abstract

The Research into the Implications of the Renting Homes Act (2016) for Refuge Accommodation was commissioned to provide supplementary qualitative evidence to inform the wider evaluation of the Renting Homes Act.

At the outset this research sought to understand survivors’ experiences of the Act. As the research progressed, a sample of survivors could not be arranged. In response to this, the researchers conducted a literature review and semi-structured interviews with a small number of key stakeholders designed to examine how the Act has affected the management and provision of refuge accommodation.

Stakeholders recognised that the Act sought to provide consistency, security and greater rights to occupiers.

As regards consistency, there were issues over differences in legal advice provided about the effects of the Act, and different local authority practices experienced.

As regards security and rights, while participants understood the motivations for the Act’s provisions, they expressed different views about their efficacy and workability. Participants views were affected partly by a misunderstanding of the Act and although a limited sample, participants had not experienced a survivor refusing an offer of accommodation due to their increased security and rights under the Act.

Contextual challenges were raised by participants. First, there was a lack of move-on accommodation available to them, particularly in some areas, which meant that survivors stayed in refuge accommodation for longer periods. Secondly, there was greater demand for refuge accommodation. Thirdly, some survivors approached refuges with more complex needs than had previously been found. Additionally, one charitable agency said that since 2016, service providers and their staff had adopted and developed more trauma-informed practices and understandings.

Although management arrangements are different across the sector, there was a suggestion that some Registered Social Landlords are exercising closer oversight over service providers. This shift may have been in train before the Act, but the Act itself has hastened this closer oversight.

As regards the extension of licences, participants felt that the local authorities with which they engage have inconsistent practices as regards process and the degree of oversight. Practices range from an exchange of emails to formal applications. Some authorities automatically accept extensions, whereas others do not approve all applications.

Few participants had used the power to exclude an occupier for 48 hours. The power was said to require considerable administrative time, and they would commonly be unable to source alternative accommodation. Further, the limited period was said to be unlikely to achieve anything.

The primary contribution of this report has been to add to an under-researched area, detailing findings of research undertaken with key stakeholders and exploring at greater depth their views of the effects of the Renting Homes Act 2016 on the refuge sector.

More information

Identifiers

ORCID for Helen Carr: orcid.org/0000-0001-8025-1288

Catalogue record

Export record