Image: Istock
Social housing regulation: two years on
Lessons learned from the strengthened consumer standards and what comes next
REGULATION
Catherine Little
Director, Campbell Tickell
Catherine Little
Director, Campbell Tickell
Issue 84 | June 2026
Two years into the strengthened consumer standards and updated approach to regulation, the sector is beginning to see clearer patterns in what drives good performance and where risks persist. Our joint webinar with the Housing Diversity Network brought together regulator, governance, inclusion and resident perspectives to explore how far the regime has shifted culture, outcomes and accountability and what’s next in store.
A system in transition, not fully mature
Kate Dodsworth, Chief Regulatory Engagement Officer, confirmed the sector is now halfway through a four-year inspection programme, offering ‘really good, rich data to look at’.
Inspection results show variation, particularly between housing associations and local authorities, though this is attributed partly to different starting points. Crucially, there is not yet clear evidence that size or geography determine performance.
What is emerging, however, is that quick fixes are not enough to achieve regulatory and tenant outcomes.
What ‘good’ looks like
Across those achieving the highest (C1) ratings, consistent themes are becoming clear.
Firstly, the importance of strong governance, with clear risk appetite, credible assurance and timely action on weaknesses. Secondly, high-quality data is critical, especially around stock condition and tenant safety, used actively by boards to anticipate risk. Thirdly embedding tenant voice, so that feedback clearly shapes services and decisions.
The defining characteristic, though, is mindset. Stronger organisations demonstrate curiosity, transparency and a proactive approach to risk and performance.
Kate captured this shift: ‘That curiosity to thread up to a board… and understand things more quickly to resolve them… sets the cultural leadership.’
Governance is the root cause and the solution
Building on this, Ceri Victory-Rowe, Director at Campbell Tickell, argued that consumer outcomes are ultimately a test of governance effectiveness.
‘When we tug on a consumer thread we so often, if not always, find governance challenges or failures.’
While presenting issues often relate to repairs, safety, complaints or engagement, the underlying causes are more systemic: weak risk management, poor data integrity, lack of assurance, insufficient scrutiny, and critically, organisational culture.
Ceri reinforced that culture is not abstract but decisive: ‘If your culture doesn’t support those [plans and processes]… you will fail.’
Conversely, strong governance creates resilience. Organisations that demonstrate self-awareness, ownership of improvement, and grip on delivery are more likely to maintain regulatory confidence – even where issues exist.
“Risk isn’t evenly distributed. The residents most affected when systems fail tend to be the most vulnerable.”
Inclusion as a core regulatory issue
Mushtaq Khan, CEO of Housing Diversity Network (HDN), positioned diversity and inclusion as central to consumer regulation, not an add-on.
‘Risk isn’t evenly distributed. The residents most affected when systems fail tend to be the most vulnerable.’
He highlighted a more challenging operating context, including rising community tensions, mistrust around allocations, and increased safety concerns. Boards must actively engage with these realities and define clear organisational positions.
Analysis from HDN suggests a strong relationship between inclusion and regulatory performance. Organisations with higher consumer grades tend also to demonstrate stronger inclusion across engagement, accessibility, fairness and understanding of communities.
However, gaps remain between policy and lived experience. A survey carried out by HDN found lower confidence among minority groups in areas such as career progression and fairness, indicating that stated commitments do not translate into outcomes.
The resident perspective: progress, but not yet trust
From a tenant viewpoint, Pamela Newman, vice chair and member of the G15 Residents Group, highlighted clear improvements, particularly the increased emphasis on engagement and transparency.
‘There must be a clear flow-through. You cannot achieve those grades without showing that you are acting and working with residents.’
However, she emphasised that meaningful engagement, not performative activity, is what matters, and rebuilding trust will take time. Strong activity is often happening behind the scenes but not always communicated effectively to residents.
She also stressed a growing capability gap: many residents lack the time or support to engage with complex regulatory changes.
Her core message was clear: ‘Regulation succeeds when tenants feel heard and they trust their landlords.’
Are tenants feeling the difference?
The panel’s answer was mixed. Some organisations are making tangible progress, with more meaningful engagement and clearer links between feedback and service improvements.
But others remain at an early stage, and some activity is still perceived as performative. Moreover, many of the most important improvements – such as better stock condition data and compliance systems – may not yet be visible to tenants day-to-day.
Kate offered a candid assessment: ‘There will be many tenants for whom this isn’t being felt.’
“Regulation succeeds when tenants feel heard and they trust their landlords.”
The questions boards should now be asking
The discussion converged on a set of simple but powerful questions boards should be asking regularly:
- What’s our purpose and are we fulfilling it?
- How do we know? (on assurance and data)
- What matters most to our customers and how are we performing?
- Has resident feedback shaped our response?
These reflect a broader shift toward outcome-focused, evidence-driven governance rooted in customer experience.
A final challenge: test at the edges
The closing reflection returned to risk and assurance. Mushtaq warned that organisations can develop a false sense of confidence if they focus on average performance rather than those most at risk.
‘Organisations really should be thinking about testing themselves around the edges, rather than at the centre.’
Conclusion
Two years on, consumer regulation is clearly driving change: stronger governance, better data, and a renewed focus on tenant voice. But the impact is uneven and much of the deepest change – particularly around culture, inclusion and trust – is still in progress.
The message from across the panel was consistent: success under the consumer standards is not about compliance alone. It depends on curiosity, honesty, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truth, grounded in a clear understanding of what matters most to tenants, and how well it is being delivered.
“Organisations really should be thinking about testing themselves around the edges, rather than at the centre.”
