LGA Response to MHCLG Consultation on a reformed Decent Homes Standard for social and privately rented homes

The Local Government Association (LGA) is the national membership body for councils in England, working on their behalf to champion and be the voice of local government, ensuring it has the resources, powers and support to deliver the best possible outcomes.

We are a politically led, cross-party organisation, providing advice, support and services to all local authorities in England and Wales – including non-member councils and combined authorities – on critical issues like social care, housing, and climate change. While headquartered in London, we have a local footprint, regional presence, and national reach, with staff located and working around the country.

Key messages

• The LGA supports the extension of the Decent Homes Standard into the private rented sector alongside reforms to the standard to ensure it is fit for purpose. Further consideration should be given to implementing the proposals outlined in the consultation, where the costs of meeting the standard will strain already stretched local authority finances and could result in decreasing the supply of housing available.
• The proposed Decent Homes Standards and Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards will place additional costs on councils Housing Revenue Accounts (HRAs) Rent convergence, if implemented, will provide additional income but this will not be sufficient to meet the government’s expectations on new supply of homes in addition to  improved quality of the existing stock.
• Given the extreme pressures facing local authority homelessness services, with record numbers of households in temporary accommodation, careful thought needs to be given to how any new prescribed standards for temporary accommodation could be practically implemented, to ensure that temporary accommodation supply is not inadvertently cut off in the short to medium-term.
• The deadline for implementation for the DHS should be 2037 and there should not be phasing in of elements of the DGS ahead of the final implementation deadline. 

The LGA supports the extension of the Decent Homes Standard into the private rented sector alongside reforms to the standard to ensure it is fit for purpose. Further consideration should be given to implementing the proposals outlined in the consultation however, where the costs of meeting the standard will strain already stretched local authority finances and could result in decreasing the supply of housing available. 

The new duties for councils to meet the standard in their own housing stock and also enforce the regulations in the private sector emanating from these reforms will only be implementable if they are supported by upfront and sufficient new burdens funding. It would be unrealistic and impractical to expect councils, some of whom are already experiencing financial challenges, to be able to enforce the standard without additional, upfront funding to offset the new responsibilities. To illustrate those financial challenges, prior to the 2025 Spending Review, the LGA estimated that councils faced a funding gap of £8.4 billion by 2028/29, compared to 2023/24, based on projected cost pressure and modelled income.

For councils to meet the standard in their own stock they will be required to fund the works from their Housing Revenue Accounts where they have them. LGA analysis shows over one third of HRAs are in a deficit this financial year, representing £201 million for these councils. 19% of HRA’s have projected a shortfall every year over the past three years, and over one third will hold equivalent to less than 10% of their annual spending their reserves by the end of 25/26. 

Income that supports HRA’s is budgeted to stay the same in real terms this year whilst costs will increase by 1.2% in real terms. This increases pressures on businesses plans and underlines the need for funding other than annual rent uplifts to cover all necessary expenditure requirements. As a result, the Government’s new burdens doctrine should be extended to Housing Revenue Accounts so that local authorities know that any new policies will be fully funded and they do not have to ‘cost-in’ the risk to their business plans and they will be able to deliver on the new responsibilities. 

To deliver the best results for the private rented sector (PRS), councils must have the resources to regulate proactively, going above and beyond relying on residents to make a complaint when the property doesn’t comply. This means targeting inspections towards properties that are non-decent and that are experiencing the most severe challenges. A proactive approach to raising quality standards is being adopted in the social housing sector by the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH), and therefore the new burdens assessment must enable councils to take a similar approach if standards in the PRS are to be brought into line with other sectors. In accordance with the LGA’s guidance on new burdens, our recommendation is that the new burden should be assessed on the basis of funding additional staff to undertake it. Without additional staff being supported through new burdens funding, the same number of officers will be required to undertake an even greater number of responsibilities.

While members are supportive in principle of the list of building components and amendments to the definition of ‘decent’, such as the requirement for window restrictors and the removal of the from the definition of disrepair as outlined in the new standard, there are concerns about the approach to being able to meet the standard. Generally, expanding the list of components to be kept in good repair under DHS will result in properties falling in and out of disrepair more frequently across sectors and will largely require a more responsive than planned maintenance programme of work.  local authorities and landlords could find themselves disproportionately penalised under the standards as a result of delays in the reporting and repairing system. Secondly, the increased cost of responsive repairs compared to planned maintenance will also result in extra financial burdens to councils because of market fluctuations in costs, being harder to budget and account for, and a greater number of component responsibilities. Aligning the descriptions to the Housing Health and Safety Rating System and other legislation will also be important to maintain consistency across the sector for clarity. 

The LGA has serious concerns regarding the consultation estimation for costings of the DHS under the 2037 timelines as being £5,079 per effected property to bring it in line with the standard. This is particularly the case in relation to the cost of the provision of floor coverings and damp and mould treatment. The proposal to ensure there is funding in line with the new burdens doctrine for the enforcement required is welcomed. However the cost to councils of implementing the standard in their own properties must be reflected in a future funding settlement for Housing Revenue Accounts as noted above. 

There are concerns around some specific elements of implementation where engagement with the sector to ensure approaches are practical would be welcomed (?). This includes clarification on areas such as internal wall and ceiling finish where plastering where there is not a structural need for it will be a significant expense that is not necessary leading to undue burdens for local authorities.   

Temporary Accommodation 

It is right that everyone, including those who are experiencing homelessness are housed in accommodation that is of an appropriate quality. Local authorities face extreme housing and homelessness pressures with record numbers of households in temporary accommodation at 131,000, including 169,000 children, an increase of 89% over the last decade. The cost to councils is £1.06 billion per year paid from their own f or grant. As such, careful thought needs to be given to how any new standards for temporary accommodation could be practically implemented, to ensure that temporary accommodation supply is not inadvertently cut off in the short to medium-term which would drive a need to use more expensive forms of accommodation including hotels. It is right that for temporary accommodation which does not have kitchen/bathroom contained facilities should be exempt from meeting the standard, however the other measures will still put a strain on the supply of temporary accommodation and requires funding to support.  

Supported Housing 

The LGA supports the principle that people living in supported housing should have access to safe, good quality homes, and we welcome the consultation’s recognition that this sector requires some flexibility. However, we are concerned that the interaction between a reformed Decent Homes Standard, the forthcoming National Supported Housing Standards, and the new licensing regime under the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act risks creating duplication and confusion for providers and councils.

We are also concerned about the cost implications of applying the Decent Homes Standard to supported housing. Upgrading older stock to meet higher standards may be essential, but without transitional funding or clarity on how costs will be recovered through housing benefit, providers may exit the market. This would put further pressure on councils’ ability to meet housing need, at a time when supported housing is already under significant strain.

Government must therefore ensure that any reform of the Decent Homes Standard for supported housing is proportionate, aligned with existing regulatory reforms, and supported by appropriate funding. Without this, there is a real risk of undermining supply and reducing the availability of the safe, specialist accommodation that vulnerable residents rely on.

Leasehold/Commonhold

With regard to the leasehold and commonhold proposals, it is essential that any new enforcement responsibilities placed on local authorities are matched with adequate funding. The potential increase in inspection frequency, coupled with existing shortages in trained and skilled staff, will place additional strain on already stretched local resources. 

All listed areas should be included within the guidance, alongside best practice for cases of ‘no access’ where entry to the property is refused . The guidance should also clarify on any areas such as where properties do not have a feature listed in the DHS that it will not be grounds for failure of the DHS.  

All suggested items listed in the consultation should be clearly included within the guidance, as well as with accompanying best practice approaches for situations where access to a property is not possible. The guidance should also clarify that the absence of a specific feature listed in the Decent Homes Standard (DHS) should not, in itself, constitute a failure to meet the standard—particularly where that feature is not expected or required for the type of property in question.

The deadline for implementation for the DHS should be 2037 and there should not be phasing in of elements of the DGS ahead of the final implementation deadline.

In both the private and social rented sector there should be flexibility in meeting the standard where there are any planning or physical factors that prevent works from being carried out, and where there are cases of refusal of access there should be flexibility given alongside published best practice guidance on this