Housing loophole puts domestic abuse victims at risk even if they leave home, council warns

The council is pushing for regulations allowing local authorities to evict abusers. Photograph: Google

A social housing loophole is putting domestic abuse victims at risk of manipulation even if they flee their homes, the council has warned.

Hackney is among many councils pushing for new regulations that would empower it and all local authorities to evict domestic abusers who right now can exploit and weaponise tenancy agreements to “coercively control” victims. Under UK law, joint tenancies treat couples as a single unit, meaning both remain liable for the tenancy, rent and property conditions if a survivor of abuse leaves the property.

The council said there were situations where even if victims get a court order they cannot legally change the locks to keep perpetrators out of the house due to both names being on the tenancy. Meanwhile, controlling partners could potentially strip the victim of their home without their knowledge or consent, or use the threat as a way of keeping them trapped.

Scotland earlier this month approved regulations that would allow social landlords to apply to the courts to remove people believed to be abusive from tenancy agreements. This is set to come into force from 1 August 2026.

For authorities in England, however, working around this remains fraught with risk. In a report published this week, Hackney Council officers highlighted that transferring the tenancy to one person can burden victims of domestic abuse with court costs up to £20,000 if they can’t get legal aid.

Victims in social housing also face a catch-22 if they leave their home while their name is still on the tenancy. Since they are still technically ‘housed’ in the eyes of the law, they cannot claim housing benefit for a safe property elsewhere.

Another danger is that survivors may be reluctant to quit and end the tenancy due to fear of reprisals from the perpetrators – who could also pressure their victims to change their sole tenancy to a joint one.

While the council said it can evict domestic abusers from their homes if it has enough proof, this still involves a “lengthy and costly” court process which relies on the victim having already left the property.

At a council meeting on Wednesday, January 21, Assistant Director of Tenancy Services, Helena Stephenson, acknowledged that the council needed much more data on who was living “behind the doors”. But she added that its existing system is “just not a fit vessel” for all these records to go into.

Since 2022, Hackney Council reported dealing with 86 ‘high risk moves’, and 7% of these were domestic abuse cases with joint tenancies.

Officers say the council is relying on “creative workarounds” to address these risk, including by setting up a new specialised team to manage all domestic abuse support, instead of relying on pulling resources from various teams.

The Town Hall is also exploring discretionary offers of new tenancies, but admitted that these could also leave victims in limbo because these do not offer a legal right to housing.

Cllr Clare Joseph (Labour) raised concerns that this still relied on abusers having a court conviction. The borough’s domestic abuse and housing specialist, Eleonora Serafini, said the policy should be “potentially more flexible” in the future once the government rolls out Domestic Abuse Protection Orders (DAPOs) across the country.

“These were crafted to better address coercive control,” she said.

The government says DAPOs will better protect victims from domestic abuse by providing stronger measures like distance bans, curfews, device bans and even mandatory behaviour change programs on the perpetrator. These could be used in both civil and criminal cases, with serious penalties for breaches.

The council said it is also exploring ways to work with neighbouring authorities and registered social landlords to make it easier for survivors if they need to leave the borough for their safety.

However, the report stressed that there were problems with other councils “gatekeeping” and refusing victims from other boroughs help, housing support, or telling them to go back to their old property.