What is the Government proposing?

The Government has announced that its landmark Social Housing Bill will give landlords and courts new powers to evict perpetrators of domestic abuse from social homes, without the victim having to leave first.

According to the Government’s announcement, the proposed protections are designed to deal with a deeply unfair position in the current system. At present, landlords can only evict a perpetrator after the victim has already left the home. In joint tenancies, the victim may have to end the tenancy entirely, potentially leaving themselves homeless.

The proposed Bill also aims to close a loophole where an abuser can serve a Notice to Quit and use the tenancy itself as a weapon to make the victim homeless. Under the proposed reforms, a Notice to Quit served by a perpetrator would not end the social housing joint tenancy while relevant court proceedings are ongoing.

In joint tenancy cases, courts would also be able to transfer the tenancy into the victim’s sole name. Where staying in the property is not appropriate, the court may be able to require the landlord to provide suitable alternative accommodation where available.

The Government has said that around 15,000 households in England were forced to find a new social home last year because of domestic abuse. That is not a marginal issue. It is a major housing, safety and justice problem.

Why have survivors so often been expected to leave?

In domestic abuse cases, the survivor is often told to “get out”, “go somewhere safe”, “stay with family”, “go to refuge”, “move area” or “start again”.

Sometimes leaving is necessary. Some homes are not safe. Some perpetrators are dangerous. Some situations require urgent relocation, emergency accommodation, refuge space, police involvement, injunctions or safeguarding intervention.

But the problem is that leaving has too often become the default expectation placed on the person experiencing the abuse, rather than the person causing the harm.

That approach can punish the survivor. It can mean:

• losing the family home;
• children changing school;
• loss of childcare arrangements;
• loss of local support networks;
• increased isolation;
• disruption to work or benefits;
• problems accessing healthcare;
• loss of community ties;
• moving into temporary or unsuitable accommodation;
• being placed far away from friends and family;
• financial instability; and
• being forced to rebuild life from crisis, rather than from safety.

The proposed reforms are therefore important because they challenge a long-standing structural imbalance. They ask whether the system should be quicker, clearer and more willing to remove the person causing harm, rather than uprooting the person trying to escape it.

Housing as a weapon of coercive control

Domestic abuse is not only physical violence. It can include coercive and controlling behaviour, emotional abuse, economic abuse, intimidation, isolation and threats.

Housing can be part of that control.

A perpetrator may use housing to:

• threaten homelessness;
• refuse to leave the property;
• control access to keys, bills or documents;
• prevent the survivor from contacting the landlord;
• damage the property and blame the survivor;
• create rent arrears as a form of economic abuse;
• use a joint tenancy to maintain control;
• threaten to serve a Notice to Quit;
• refuse to cooperate with housing applications;
• use the children’s home as leverage; or
• force the survivor into an impossible choice between safety and homelessness.

This is why tenancy reform matters. If the tenancy itself can be weaponised, then housing law becomes part of the safeguarding landscape.

Why this matters for children

Domestic abuse does not only affect adults. Children who live in homes where domestic abuse occurs are impacted by the abuse, the fear, the instability and the aftermath.

When a survivor is forced to leave, children may also be forced to leave:

• their bedroom;
• their school;
• their friends;
• their routines;
• their healthcare providers;
• their local family support;
• their pets;
• their safe adults;
• their sense of familiarity; and
• their community.

In some cases, relocation is essential. Safety comes first. But where the survivor and children can remain safely in the home, it may reduce disruption and help recovery.

Stability matters after trauma. A child who has already experienced fear, conflict or coercive control may need routine, school continuity and familiar support more than ever.

The family court connection

Housing instability often appears alongside family court proceedings. A parent experiencing domestic abuse may be dealing with:

• a non-molestation order application;
• an occupation order application;
• child arrangements proceedings;
• Cafcass safeguarding enquiries;
• allegations of coercive control;
• disputes about where children should live;
• supervised contact requests;
• fact-finding hearings;
• police involvement;
• local authority involvement;
• housing applications; and
• urgent welfare concerns.

The family court may be asked to make orders about children while housing is unstable. That can complicate everything. A parent without secure accommodation may be unfairly perceived as less stable, even where the housing instability was caused by abuse.

This is why the housing reforms matter beyond housing law. They may affect how survivors are able to participate in family proceedings, how quickly children regain stability, and whether perpetrators can continue using housing insecurity as leverage.

The detail and implementation will matter

The proposed reforms are encouraging, but the detail will matter enormously.

The key questions include:

• How quickly will landlords act when domestic abuse is reported?
• What evidence will be required?
• Will survivors be believed at an early stage?
• How will risk be assessed?
• What safeguards will exist against misuse?
• How will courts balance tenancy rights, safety and evidence?
• Will landlords receive proper domestic abuse training?
• What happens where the perpetrator contests the allegations?
• How will children’s needs be assessed?
• What alternative accommodation will be available where staying is unsafe?
• How will local authorities avoid simply moving the victim by another route?
• Will survivors have access to legal advice?

The law can create a route. But the route must work in real life.

Survivors should not be trapped in slow, confusing or evidentially impossible processes. If the system requires survivors to prove too much too early, without support, the reform may fail the very people it is designed to protect.

Practical steps for survivors and litigants in person

If domestic abuse and housing are connected in your situation, it is important to start recording the housing element clearly.

Suggested wording for a housing provider

What wider reform should look like

The Social Housing Bill is an important step, but it should be part of a wider domestic abuse and housing strategy.

1. Housing providers need specialist domestic abuse training

Frontline housing staff must understand coercive control, economic abuse, trauma, risk escalation and how perpetrators may manipulate tenancy processes.

2. Survivors need access to legal advice

Tenancy rights, occupation orders, homelessness duties, family court proceedings and safeguarding can overlap. Survivors should not have to navigate that alone.

3. Courts need clear evidence routes

If tenancy transfer or eviction depends on court proceedings, the process must be clear, timely and accessible.

4. Private renters must not be left behind

The current announcement focuses on social housing. But domestic abuse affects private renters too. Housing insecurity in the private rented sector remains a major access-to-safety issue.

5. Children’s stability must be central

Housing decisions should consider the child’s school, routines, community, medical care, emotional security and relationship with the protective parent.

6. Perpetrators must not be allowed to weaponise process

Any new process must anticipate delay tactics, retaliatory allegations, threats, intimidation and procedural manipulation.

7. Data must be collected and published

We need to know how often the new powers are used, whether they work, how long they take, whether survivors remain safely housed, and whether outcomes differ across regions and landlords.