Daniel Brito
By Daniel Brito, Managing Director of Legal Futures Associate National Claims [1]
Over the past three years, the number of council tenants pursuing legal action over unsafe, unhealthy or structurally compromised homes has risen sharply. What was once considered a niche or sporadic category of litigation, primarily focused on leaks, mould or disrepair, has evolved into a major access-to-justice issue affecting thousands of households across the UK.
Lawyers working within housing, public sector and civil litigation increasingly find themselves at the intersection of policy failures, acute local-authority funding pressures, and shifting regulatory expectations around habitability. Understanding why claims are increasing is critical not only to representing clients competently, but to anticipating how housing-condition litigation is likely to develop over the next decade.
This blog explores the drivers behind the surge: structural underinvestment, regulatory tightening, the data landscape, the role of social media and public scrutiny, and the legal profession’s evolving responsibilities. It is deliberately non-promotional in nature, focusing instead on the systemic conditions shaping claim volume and complexity.
Chronic underinvestment collides with escalating repair backlogs
It is impossible to examine tenant litigation trends without first acknowledging the long-term context. Local authorities and housing associations have faced more than a decade of constrained budgets, compounded by inflationary pressures, rising labour costs and contractor shortages. Many councils have openly reported repair backlogs stretching into tens of thousands of outstanding jobs.
When maintenance budgets fall in real terms, reactive repair cycles lengthen. Minor leaks become structural damp; unaddressed condensation becomes black mould; ageing boilers or electrics remain in situ past their safe lifespan. These cases no longer involve isolated defects, they indicate estate-wide degradation.
For lawyers, this means:
- More cases where multiple hazards exist simultaneously
- Greater volume of evidence to catalogue
- Increasing reliance on expert inspection and environmental health reporting
- A need to understand the operational constraints councils face—not to excuse them, but to contextualise delay
Ultimately, more complex cases. And where councils lack reserves to undertake major works, tenants increasingly view litigation not as a choice but the only route to compel action.
The Awaab Ishak Case
Few single events have recalibrated public expectations as powerfully as the tragic death of Awaab Ishak, the two-year-old Rochdale boy who died in 2020 from prolonged exposure to mould. The coroner’s findings, published in 2022, ignited a national conversation about health risks linked to housing conditions.
From a legal perspective, the case had a multiplier effect:
- It heightened public awareness about damp and mould as serious health hazards, not mere inconveniences.
- It created political consensus that existing frameworks had failed vulnerable tenants.
- It prompted new regulatory provisions; the “Awaab’s Law” amendments, which impose strict timeframes on social landlords to investigate and remedy hazards.
Although the law is still being operationalised, tenants increasingly cite it in complaints and pre-action correspondence. Landlords now face a clearer statutory expectation to act quickly, and lawyers are observing shorter windows between hazard identification and enforcement.
This tragic case changed the narrative: sub-standard conditions were no longer framed as isolated failures, but as systemic risks with potential life-and-death consequences.
Increased data transparency
Another reason for rising litigation is that tenants have access to better information, often for the first time. Several developments contribute to this:
- Various public reports, including those from the Regulator of Social Housing and individual local authority disclosures, have highlighted the scale of disrepair across England, a problem examined in detail inside the UK’s council housing disrepair and its most alarming realities [2]. When tenants see data showing that half the homes on their estate fail the Decent Homes Standard, it strengthens their belief that their experience is not unusual and may represent legal non-compliance.
- Post-Grenfell, local authorities have become more willing to escalate Category 1 and Category 2 hazards using Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) powers. Those enforcement notices are public documents and often referenced by legal representatives.
- Smartphone photos, humidity readings, mould-tracking apps and tenant WhatsApp groups all accelerate evidence gathering. Clients now come prepared with a timeline and supporting imagery long before instructing a solicitor or claims firm.
The outcome is greater tenant confidence and more comprehensive evidential bundles at the outset of a claim, driving both volume and quality.
The changing claimants
Historically, housing disrepair claims were predominantly initiated by tenants already engaging with advice centres, charities or local community lawyers. In the current landscape, we see a broader claimant profile:
- Families with young children, particularly where asthma or respiratory symptoms are present
- Medically vulnerable individuals who cannot risk prolonged exposure to hazards
- Working households who may not have engaged with legal support previously
- Tenants living in high-rise blocks, whose post-Grenfell safety concerns are heightened
The common denominator is that expectations of housing quality have shifted culturally. People are less willing to accept damp, leaks, infestations or structural issues as “part of renting.” This cultural shift increases complaint levels, which in turn increases pre-action activity and litigation.
Social media and public scrutiny
One under-discussed driver of litigation is the role of social media in influencing behaviour. Platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and X (Twitter) are full of viral videos showing mould-ridden flats, collapsed ceilings or families forced to live in unsafe high-rise environments.
For tenants, these videos validate shared experiences. For councils, they create reputational pressure. For lawyers, they introduce clients who arrive already informed about their rights, statutory obligations, and the typical compensation ranges.
This dynamic can accelerate disputes:
- Tenants who feel ignored by their landlord are more likely to escalate quickly.
- Councils concerned about reputational harm may respond faster but are also more defensive.
- Lawyers encounter clients who expect rapid outcomes, an increasing challenge given court delays.
Whilst we are not suggesting social media replaces the legal process, we can’t deny it has a huge impact and can shape claimant behaviour and legal trajectories.
Regulatory tightening
The regulatory landscape for social landlords has hardened. Important developments include:
- The strengthened role of the Regulator of Social Housing – the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 introduced tougher inspection powers, consumer standards, and enforcement capabilities. Landlords now face potential unlimited fines and emergency repairs carried out at their expense.
- Awaab’s Law response times – while secondary legislation is still being phased in, the principle is clear: hazards must be investigated within 14 days, and critical repairs completed within a matter of weeks.
- Civil penalties under the Housing Act 2004 – local authorities increasingly issue civil penalties for HHSRS breaches, particularly against housing associations whose stock scores poorly.
Regulatory pressure encourages landlords to improve conditions, but it also increases the opportunity for claimants to demonstrate systemic failure, strengthening legal arguments.
Systemic communication failures
From a claims-handling perspective, many disputes arise not solely because of the underlying hazard, but because communication between tenant and landlord breaks down. Common patterns include:
- Failure to log repair reports
- Repair jobs being marked as complete when they are not
- Contractors attending without carrying out work
- Tenants asked repeatedly to “open windows” despite structural damp
- No escalation path when repairs are delayed
Lawyers frequently become involved at the point where tenants feel unheard or dismissed. The legal profession is therefore increasingly acting as a substitute escalation mechanism in systems where internal complaints processes are perceived as ineffective.
The “Health Litigation” dimension
A significant trend is the crossover between housing condition cases and personal injury. As more medical professionals recognise the health implications of damp, mould, infestations and cold, tenants are presenting with:
- Worsening asthma
- Chronic coughs
- Skin conditions
- Mental health symptoms
- Exacerbation of pre-existing respiratory illness
Legal teams are therefore confronting cases that combine civil procedure, medical evidence and causation analysis. This hybridisation is increasing claim complexity, expert involvement and case duration. It brings housing condition litigation closer to mainstream PI practice in terms of evidential standards.
Court capacity and delays are reshaping strategy
The sharp rise in claims is occurring at a time when the civil courts face significant delays. Housing disrepair trials can take well over a year to list in some regions. As a result:
- More cases are settling early to avoid delay
- Landlords are more conscious of legal costs and judicial scrutiny
- Mediation and ADR are gaining traction, especially within pre-action protocol frameworks
However, delays also create challenges; hazards remain unresolved for longer, and tenants may experience deteriorating health and living conditions while waiting for outcomes.
So, what next?
For practitioners, the rise in housing condition litigation represents both responsibility and opportunity.
The best lawyers are those who understand both the legal framework and the operational constraints landlords face. Balanced insight helps avoid unnecessary antagonism while still advocating robustly for clients.
With councils tightening processes under regulatory pressure, poorly documented claims will struggle. Lawyers must guide clients on evidence collection from day one.
Many tenants experiencing unsafe conditions are also facing overlapping hardship, such as financial strain, health issues or limited mobility. Trauma-informed client handling is becoming best practice.
Housing condition law is one of the few areas where real-time political change is commonplace. Legal professionals should remain engaged with parliamentary developments, consultations and regulatory guidance to anticipate litigation trends.
Final thoughts
There is a persistent misconception that the rise in housing disrepair claims is driven by opportunism or “claim culture.” The reality is far from this and is more complex and sophisticated than its given credit for. Claims increase when systems fail, and in many parts of the country, the housing system is under extreme strain and isn’t fit-for-purpose.
Tenants seek legal recourse because the alternative is to continue living in unsafe environments, often with serious health consequences. Lawyers, whether acting for tenants or advising local authorities, have a critical role in navigating this landscape fairly, ethically and efficiently.
If litigation continues to rise, it will not be due to any single factor, but the cumulative effect of underinvestment, regulatory tightening, heightened public awareness and cultural shifts around acceptable living conditions. For the legal community, the challenge over the next decade is to move beyond reactive litigation and towards contributing to a framework where fewer tenants need legal action to secure a safe, habitable home.