It is important to understand the history that led to the regulation in relation to anti-
social behaviour. Social Housing (in England) is regulated by the Regulator for Social
Housing (established in 2018 from what was previously the Homes and Communities
Agency). The body regulates social housing and continues to monitor the economic
and consumer standards that social housing providers must adhere to via a statutory
56
1. Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard
2. Home Standard
3. Tenancy Standard
4. Neighbourhood and Community Standard
The Neighbourhood and Community Standard covers how registered providers deal
with anti-social behaviour. This standard does not require registered providers to
resolve all instances of anti-social behaviour, only to work in partnership with other
agencies in an attempt to do so. There is no reference in relation to domestic abuse in
any of the other three consumer standards meaning that there is no regulatory
requirement for housing providers to recognise or respond to domestic abuse.
The regulator makes no reference at all to domestic abuse in the two page document
that sets out expectations in relation to the Neighbourhood and Community standard.
The Guide establishes that registered providers must publish an ASB policy and how
they work in partnership to prevent ASB:
‘Registered providers shall keep the neighbourhood and communal areas associated with the homes that they own clean and safe. They shall work in
57
effective to do so’. (Homes and Communities Agency, Neighbourhood and Community Standard, 2012, p.1).
As highlighted earlier in this chapter, the duty for social landlords to deal effectively
with anti-social behaviour was introduced via the Housing Act (1996). This was later
amended under Section 12 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act (2003) which placed a duty
on social landlords; including local housing authorities and housing action trusts to
publish anti-social behaviour policies and procedures so that tenants were informed
about the action and measures their landlord could take.
As outlined earlier in this chapter the regulatory process and associated powers in
social housing have historically had a strong focus on ASB which has meant that
providers are well versed and accomplished in dealing effectively with ASB.
Conversely, housing providers have never been mandated or regulated in relation to
domestic abuse, consequently, they often fail to have the same level of confidence in
recognising and responding to domestic abuse. The focus can be described as being
concerned with outside space and the impact on the community, i.e. the housing
function, rather than being primarily concerned with individuals safety per se.
Consequently, this legacy means that when housing providers do take action in
relation to domestic abuse it is often done so with a view on impact to the community
as opposed to a tenancy breach which impacts on an individual.
Since commencing this research the issue of social housing and its links to inequalities
and vulnerability has gained momentum as a concern that needs urgent attention.
58
social housing as an issue that governments must seek to address. Questions around
scarcity, quality of housing and tenants having a voice have all become much more
prominent and amplified the structural inequalities in society.
There is consensus between Malpass and Murie (1987a, 1989b) and Harloe (1985)
that in the long term social housing is likely to be predominantly residual, providing for
those low income and vulnerable households. The availability of safe, affordable
accommodation is a key determinant of women staying or leaving abusive homes.
Housing providers are not regulated in their response to domestic abuse and there is
no requirement to produce and publicise a domestic abuse policy so that tenants have
a clear understanding of the response they can expect. Whilst the Government’s consultation on the forthcoming Domestic Violence and Abuse Bill makes reference to
housing providers having a role in identifying domestic abuse, it will be interesting to
see if the Bill paves the way for any mandatory measures imposed on housing
providers’ reflecting those in place in relation to anti-social behaviour.
The recently published Government Social Housing Green Paper ‘A New Deal for Social Housing’ (2018) is underpinned by five key principles: a safe and decent home; improving how complaints are handled; empowering tenants so that landlords are held
to account; tackling stigma and lastly building social homes. MHCLG are publishing a
‘Call for Evidence’ alongside the Green Paper which will inform changes within the regulatory framework. The Green Paper announced that it is considering introducing
a new key performance indicator to help tackle anti-social behaviour but makes no
reference to regulation in relation to domestic abuse throughout the whole document.
59
2.9 Chapter Summary
This chapter has detailed the origins of social housing in the late 19th and early 20th
century which were paternalistic and concerned with the moral welfare of its tenants.
The post war consensus saw that the state had a key role in housing and it was to
some extent viewed as a form of welfare. The largest shift in ideology from 1979 was
the Conservative Government’s Right to Buy policy which was emblematic of this shift and successive governments have seen a marked move from the concept as the state
as a key provider in relation to housing. This chapter has examined the framing of
social housing as synonymous with anti-social behaviour (Hanley; 2005) which has
resulted in housing providers becoming an integral part of the legislative process with
a greater role in its management becoming housing core business – in effect being part of a coordinated community response in relation to ASB. With no regulatory
requirement to recognise and respond to domestic abuse, often where housing
providers do respond, they do so framed within an ASB response.
The next chapter will examine key issues women face in relation to housing and
60