There are 4 million households in the social rented sector. The sector is home to more vulnerable groups than other tenures, likely due to the way social housing is allocated on the basis of need.
Over half, 54 per cent, of households in the social rented sector had a household member with a disability or long-term health condition, compared to 31 per cent of owner occupiers and 25 per cent of private renters.
Social renters tend to have lower income than other tenures. Just under half (47 per cent) of social renters were in the lowest quintile, greater than the proportion of owners and private renters (13 per cent and 20 per cent respectively).
In 2019/20, the social rented sector has the highest proportion of lone parent households (22 per cent), compared to owner occupied (6 per cent) and private rented sectors (13 per cent).
The social rented sector has the highest rate of overcrowding, and the lowest rate of under-occupation.
In 2019/20, 9 per cent of homes in the social rented sector were overcrowded, the highest level recorded since 1995/96. This was higher than the proportion in the owner occupied (1 per cent) and private rented (7 per cent) sectors.
Rates of overcrowding were higher amongst local authority tenants (11 per cent) than housing association tenants (7 per cent).
London had the largest proportion of overcrowded households, compared to any other region. Of social renters in London, 17 per cent were living in overcrowded accommodation, compared to 7 per cent for the rest of England.
In the social rented sector, ethnic minority households had higher levels of overcrowding (18 per cent) than white households (at 7 per cent).
In contrast, 10 per cent of households in the social rented sector are under-occupied (i.e. have two or more spare bedrooms). This was lower than the proportion of under-occupied homes in the private rented (15 per cent) and owner occupied (52 per cent) sectors.
Most social renters are satisfied with living within the social rented sector, their accommodation and the area they live. However, the level of satisfaction is generally lower than for owners and private renters.
Over three quarters (78 per cent) of social renters said that they were satisfied with their accommodation. This was lower than the proportion of owners (95 per cent) and private renters (83 per cent) who said they were satisfied with their accommodation.
Most (80 per cent) social renters reported that they were satisfied with being a social renter. This was lower than the proportion of owners who were satisfied with being owners (98 per cent), but higher than private renters (70 per cent).
79 per cent of social renters said they were satisfied with their area. Satisfaction with the area was higher among private renters (84 per cent) and owner-occupiers (90 per cent).
Those who rent from a housing association have higher levels of satisfaction than those who rent from a local authority.
Housing association tenants reported higher levels of satisfaction with accommodation (80 per cent) than local authority tenants (75 per cent).
Similarly, a higher proportion of housing association residents said they were satisfied with their area (80 per cent) than local authority tenants (76 per cent).
While many social renters are satisfied with the housing services provided by their landlord almost a third had considered making a complaint in the last 12 months. Of those who had complained, the majority were unhappy with the response they received.
In 2019/20, 70 per cent of social renters said they were satisfied with housing services provided by their landlord and 30 per cent had considered making a complaint about housing services in the last 12 months. This was higher than the proportion of private renters who considered making a complaint (15 per cent).
Of social renters who considered making a complaint, 63 per cent complained to the landlord, 21 per cent to the management organisation, whilst 18 per cent made no complaint at all.
Of those who made a complaint, most were unhappy with the response to their complaint (59 per cent). The majority (84 per cent) of those who were unhappy with the response to their complaint did not escalate it, for example to the Housing Ombudsman Service.
Although most social renters said they found it easy to pay their rent, almost a quarter (23 per cent) of household had been in rent arrears at some point in the last 12 months.
Almost three quarters (73 per cent) of social renters said they found it easy to pay their rent. Despite this, 23 per cent of households had been in arrears at some point in the previous year. This was higher than the proportion of private renters (8 per cent).
Almost half (47 per cent) of social renters in the bottom two income quintiles spend more than 30 per cent of their income on their rent.
The household type most likely to spend more than 30 per cent of their income on their rent were single person households, 61 per cent of whom were in this situation in 2019/20.
Compared with the private rented sector, there are relatively few movers in the social rented sector and social renters have lived in their current home longer.
The average length of residence in their current home for social renters was 12.2 years. This was lower than owners (17.4 years) but higher than private renters (4.3 years).
Overall, 62 per cent of the social renters have lived in the sector for over 10 years, with 37 per cent having lived in the social rented sector for over 20 years.
Of all those who moved into a social rented property within the last year, just over half were already in the social rented sector (52 per cent). Over a quarter (27 per cent) had previously lived in the private rented sector, 18 per cent were new households and 3 per cent were previously living in an owner occupied home.
Homes in the social rented sector are more energy efficient and are less likely to have poor housing conditions than other tenures. The costs to make homes decent and more energy efficient are lower in the social rented sector than the private rented and owner occupied sectors.
In 2019, 12 per cent of social homes failed to meet the Decent Homes Standard. This compared with the 23 per cent of private rented sector stock and 16 per cent of owner occupied housing stock.
Similarly, 5 per cent of social rented dwellings had at least one Category 1 hazard, a lower proportion compared with owner occupied (10 per cent) and private rented (13 per cent) dwellings.
On average it would cost £5,077 to make a non-decent home in the social rented sector meet the Decent Homes Standard. This is less than in the private rented (£7,912) or owner occupied (£7,832) sector.
The majority of dwellings in the social rented sector were in EPC Bands A to C (61 per cent), compared with 38 per cent of private rented sector dwellings and 36 per cent of owner occupied dwellings.
The average cost to improve a social rented home to at least EPC Band C was £5,979, lower than for private rented homes (£7,646), and owner occupied homes (£8,579).
Low income social renters were more likely to live in a home that had a Category 1 hazard or that did not meet the Decent Homes Standard than higher income social renters.
Social renters in the lowest income quintile (13 per cent) were more likely to live in a non-decent home, than those in the fourth income quintile (8 per cent).
Similarly, those in the lowest and second quintiles (both 6 per cent) were more likely to live with a Category 1 hazard than households in the fourth income quintile (2 per cent).
Social renters are less likely to have private outside space, but more likely to have shared outside space than all other tenures.
62 per cent of homes in the social rented sector had a private plot (for the sole use of the dwelling) and a further 37 per cent had a plot shared with other dwellings. The remaining 1 per cent did not have a plot at all.
Social rented homes were less likely to have a private plot than owner occupied (93 per cent) and private rented homes (67 per cent). Meanwhile, social rented homes were more likely to have shared plots than private rented (28 per cent) and owner occupied (6 per cent) homes.
The variation in prevalence of plot type across tenure was likely driven by dwelling type; 42 per cent of social sector homes were purpose-built flats (low and high rise) compared with 28 per cent in the private rented sector.
By Patrick Mooney, Editor