Evicting the Abuser, Not the Survivor: New Social Housing Rights

On 20 October 2026, the Government announced proposed changes to help social housing survivors remain in their home while a perpetrator is removed. The measures are part of the Social Housing Bill, which is still progressing through Parliament. They are not yet a new legal right in force.

The proposals aim to address a difficult problem: a survivor may leave a shared home to get away from abuse, only to face the loss of their tenancy, home and local support network. The Government says the changes would help social landlords and courts take action against perpetrators while better protecting survivors’ housing security.

For anyone seeking landlord and tenant solicitors or family law solicitors UK, the key point is that housing proceedings and family court protection orders serve different purposes. One does not automatically replace the other.

What did the Government announce?

The 20 October announcement describes an amendment to the Social Housing Bill intended to strengthen its domestic abuse protections. The Bill already proposes new possession and tenancy-transfer measures. The announced amendment is intended to make the process easier for survivors where a relevant protective order is already in place, so they do not have to prove the abuse again for the landlord to consider taking action.

The Bill’s proposed framework includes:

• Possession action against a perpetrator, without requiring the survivor to leave first.
• Transfer of a joint tenancy into the survivor’s sole name in qualifying cases, where they want to stay.
• Suitable alternative social housing, where it would be unsafe or inappropriate for the survivor to remain and accommodation is available.
• Protection from retaliatory termination: in specified circumstances, an abusive joint tenant would not be able to end the tenancy unilaterally while possession proceedings are under way.

These are proposals, not a guarantee that a landlord will evict someone as soon as a survivor asks. The route depends on the tenancy, evidence, statutory conditions, court process and the Bill’s final wording and commencement arrangements.

Why could survivors lose their homes before?

A joint tenancy can create a particular difficulty. Both tenants hold rights and obligations under the tenancy. If abuse leads one person to leave, that does not automatically end their tenancy or remove the perpetrator’s rights. Nor does moving out necessarily transfer the tenancy into the survivor’s sole name.

Historically, this could leave survivors feeling they had to choose between staying in an unsafe home and leaving a home they might not be able to recover. For a family, leaving may also mean separation from schools, work, healthcare, childcare and trusted support.

There are already protections and options in some circumstances. Government homelessness guidance says that where the local authority is the landlord, it should consider whether it can evict the perpetrator and allow the survivor to remain. But safety must come first: if it would probably be unsafe for the survivor to stay, the authority should not expect them to remain or return. The guidance also says a person homeless because of domestic abuse may have priority need for accommodation.

The proposed Bill seeks to create a clearer framework for social landlords and courts, including a mechanism to transfer a joint tenancy. It does not mean that every survivor can safely stay in the property or that leaving automatically forfeits their rights.

How would the proposed possession route work?

The Bill proposes different routes for different circumstances and tenancy types. For secure council tenancies, it includes an absolute ground for possession in certain cases involving a qualifying domestic abuse offence or a court finding that a tenant breached a relevant protective order. The text also proposes a discretionary ground based on domestic abuse. Comparable provisions are proposed for certain assured social tenancies.

This distinction matters. A protective order is not, by itself, a universal automatic eviction notice. The exact route will depend on the proposed statutory conditions, the landlord’s review obligations, any appeal and the evidence before the court. The 20 October announcement says the amendment is intended to let a relevant order be sufficient for the court to consider action without requiring the survivor to prove the abuse again; it should not be read as saying that every order automatically results in possession.

If the survivor and perpetrator are joint tenants, the Bill proposes that the court can transfer the perpetrator’s interest to the survivor, rather than simply ending the tenancy. The proposed transfer would not create a new tenancy. If the court considers it inappropriate for the survivor to remain and suitable alternative accommodation is available, the transfer mechanism may not apply and possession may instead be ordered.

The proposals also seek to prevent an abusive joint tenant from using a notice to quit to end the shared tenancy while the landlord’s relevant possession process is under way. This is intended to reduce the risk that the survivor loses the home before the court can consider the case.

How do occupation and non-molestation orders fit in?

A non-molestation order can prohibit a person from molesting or harassing someone protected by the order. An occupation order can regulate who may live in a family home or enter a defined area around it. The eligibility rules depend on the relationship between the parties and their connection to the property. The Government’s occupation order guidance explains who may apply.

These are family court remedies. They may be important for immediate safety, but an occupation order does not, by itself, transfer a social housing joint tenancy into the survivor’s sole name. That is why a survivor may need advice about both family law protection and their housing position.

The Bill’s proposed possession provisions also refer to certain court findings involving breaches of non-molestation orders or Domestic Abuse Protection Orders. The precise requirements matter: a survivor should not assume that obtaining an order alone ends the perpetrator’s tenancy.

What evidence and steps may help?

There is no single checklist that applies to every case. A social landlord or housing authority may need information to assess safety, tenancy status and the route available. Depending on the circumstances, useful material may include:

• A copy of any non-molestation order, occupation order or other relevant protective order.
• Court documents or police information, if available and safe to obtain.
• A clear record of incidents and their effect on the survivor and any children.
• Relevant communications, photographs, medical information or records from a support service.
• The tenancy agreement, rent account details and correspondence with the landlord.
• Information about the survivor’s wishes, safety concerns and whether staying in the home is suitable.

Do not put yourself at risk to collect documents or confront the other tenant. Government homelessness guidance says authorities should not impose a blanket requirement for corroborative or police evidence, and that information gathering should not increase the risk of further abuse.

A survivor can contact the landlord’s domestic abuse or housing team and ask for a confidential safety and tenancy review. They can ask what possession, transfer or alternative-accommodation options may apply, and request that contact and records are handled safely. If it is not safe to remain, they can contact the local housing authority for a homelessness assessment. In an immediate emergency, call 999.

What should social landlords review?

Social landlords should prepare to act lawfully and sensitively if the Bill becomes law. That means reviewing domestic abuse and possession policies, training housing staff to identify abuse, and setting out how cases are referred for legal, safeguarding and homelessness support.

They should also consider how to protect a survivor’s confidential information, assess risk without alerting the alleged perpetrator, record the survivor’s wishes, and coordinate with relevant services where appropriate. Policies should distinguish between a family court order, a housing decision and a tenancy transfer: each has a different legal effect.

The legislation is still subject to parliamentary process and commencement. Social landlords should monitor the final text and guidance rather than treating the announcement as an operative rule today.

Housing rights and family law advice

These proposals could make a significant difference for some social tenants, but they are not yet a substitute for urgent, individual advice. A survivor’s safest option may be to remain at home, seek a transfer or move to suitable alternative accommodation. The right course depends on the risk, the tenancy and the legal facts.

The Bill concerns social housing; it is not a general eviction route for every private tenancy. And an occupation order, while potentially important for protection, does not itself settle the tenancy.

For related guidance, read our articles on cohabitation rights and the limits of “common-law marriage” and child arrangements in a high-conflict separation. These cover separate issues; housing and child arrangements each need advice tailored to the circumstances.

Tyndel Solicitors advises on landlord and tenant matters and family law, including protective orders. The firm serves clients in England and Wales.

Request a Free Consultation

If you need advice about a social tenancy, possession proceedings or protective orders, contact Tyndel Solicitors to discuss your situation.

Call: 0208 154 3131
Email: [email protected]
Office: 58 Peregrine Road, Ilford, IG6 3SZ
Opening hours: Monday–Friday, 10:00–18:00

Landlord and Tenant services · Family Law services