Consultation outcome

Awaab’s Law: Consultation on timescales for repairs in the social rented sector - government response

Updated 25 June 2025

Ministerial foreword

The tragic death of Awaab Ishak in 2022 was wholly preventable. The toddler lost his life after his family’s landlord failed to treat the mould problem – a known health hazard - in their Rochdale Boroughwide Housing flat, even after his parents repeatedly raised concerns. 

The news of Awaab’s death sent shockwaves through Greater Manchester, where I am an MP, and around the country. It was a case that horrified the public and brought shame to our modern society, highlighting the urgent need for broader housing reforms.  

Every tenant deserves safe, healthy conditions as a basic right and I pay heartfelt tribute to the resolute campaign that Awaab’s parents have led in their son’s name. Despite their grief, they have fought for higher living standards for all social rented tenants so that no other family should endure what they have suffered.  

I am extremely proud today to be bringing forward the legislation for the first phase of Awaab’s Law that will empower tenants with a stronger, louder voice; and place clear legal responsibilities on landlords to provide safe homes.  

But as a government our commitment goes even further. We want millions more people to benefit from the protections Awaab’s Law offers. We have therefore pledged to extend Awaab’s Law to the private rented sector – improving living conditions and standards across the board. Details of this will be consulted on in due course.  

I know that many social landlords take their responsibilities seriously. But we still have far too many people living in mouldy and damp buildings. Under Awaab’s Law, landlords will have to investigate and fix serious health and safety hazards promptly. Should social landlords fail to meet strict deadlines, they must provide safe alternative accommodation – and if they don’t, tenants will have the power to take them to court.  

I would like to thank everyone who has responded to the consultation and helped shape this vital policy, and Shelter and the Manchester Evening News for their unwavering support for Awaab’s parents. It is my heartfelt hope that, from the tragedy of their son’s death, Awaab’s Law will inspire a profound shift in how social landlords approach their responsibilities - making it clear that the safety and well-being of residents must always come first. 

Rt Hon Angela Rayner, Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

Executive summary

1. Awaab’s Law will empower tenants to hold social landlords to account if they fail to address serious hazards by set deadlines. We want to make sure that social landlords take tenants’ concerns seriously, treat them with empathy, dignity and respect, and fix dangerous problems quickly.

2. A consultation ran from 9 January to 5 March 2024 to seek views on proposals for the implementation of Awaab’s Law in the social rented sector. A consultation stage Impact Assessment was published alongside the consultation, in which views were sought on the estimated costs and benefits of Awaab’s Law. The consultation received 1,028 responses in total from social housing tenants, landlords, other organisations and the public. All policy proposals were supported by the majority of respondents.

3. In parallel to publishing this response, government is laying regulations to introduce Awaab’s Law to the social rented sector. Social landlords will be required to:

• Investigate any potential hazards within 10 working days of becoming aware of them.
• Produce a written summary of investigation findings and provide this to tenants within 3 working days of the investigation concluding in most cases.
• Take action to make the home safe (using temporary measures if necessary) within 5 working days of the end of the investigation.
• Begin, or take steps to begin, any further required works within 5 working days of the investigation concluding, if the investigation identifies a significant or emergency hazard. If steps cannot be taken to begin work in 5 working days this must be done as soon as possible, and work must be physically started within 12 weeks.
• Satisfactorily complete repairs within a reasonable time period, without unreasonable delays.
• Investigate and take action on all emergency hazards as soon as possible and within 24 hours.
• Provide suitable alternative accommodation if the landlord is unable to complete work to make the home safe within 5 working days, or 24 hours in emergency situations.

Awaab’s Law ‘implies’ (or inserts) terms into social housing tenancy agreements so that, once regulations are in force, all social landlords will have to comply with the requirements. If they do not, tenants can take legal action through the courts for a breach of contract. 

4. These requirements will be introduced in phases:

• From 27 October 2025 Awaab’s Law will apply to damp and mould hazards that present a significant risk of harm (“significant hazards”), and all emergency hazards.
• In 2026, we will extend the requirements to also include the following significant hazards: excess cold and excess heat; falls; structural collapse; fire; electrical and explosions; and hygiene hazards.
• Then in 2027, we will extend the requirements to the remaining types of hazards covered by the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) (excluding overcrowding) where they are significant hazards. The full list of hazards within scope of Awaab’s Law can be found in Annex A.

5. We want to make sure that this policy works effectively, creating a positive impact for all tenants and leaving a lasting legacy. As such, we will take a ‘test and learn’ approach to implementing the policy. We will closely monitor and evaluate the impact Awaab’s Law is having and the effectiveness of the processes put in place to implement it and, can clarify or flex our approach to deliver the best outcomes if we need to. The regulations for Phase 1 are being laid alongside the publication of the government response. This will allow us to test and learn between phases and to make changes to policy if needed as the regulations for each phase are made.

6. Introducing these requirements in a phased way does not mean that social landlords have leeway on addressing dangerous issues in their homes in the meantime. Social landlords should continue to meet their legal duties to keep homes safe by fixing disrepair, and keeping their homes fit for human habitation and free of dangerous ‘category 1’ health and safety hazards.

7. Government is publishing initial guidance for landlords alongside the regulations to support landlords in the implementation of these requirements. We will publish final guidance for landlords ahead of the regulations coming into force, to reflect any further concerns or feedback from the sector, as well as guidance for tenants on how to exercise their rights under Awaab’s Law.

8. Since the consultation this government has worked with landlords and tenants to develop a set of workable and deliverable proposals. We want to deliver meaningful change for all tenants. This document sets out the findings of the consultation, the government’s response to the findings, and further detail on the new requirements under Awaab’s Law.

The consultation: content and approach

9. The purpose of the consultation was to seek views from social housing tenants, landlords, and other interested organisations across the sector. The consultation sought views on the following proposals:

i. If a social landlord is made aware of a potential hazard in a social home, they must investigate within 14 calendar days;
ii. The social landlord must provide a written summary of the investigation findings to the tenant within 48 hours that includes details of any hazard identified and (if applicable) next steps, including a timeline for repair and a schedule of works;
iii. If the investigation finds a significant risk to the health or safety of the resident, the social landlord must begin repair works within 7 calendar days of the written summary being issued;
iv. The social landlord must satisfactorily complete repair works within a reasonable time period. The tenant should be informed of this time period and their needs should be considered;
v. The social landlord must action emergency repairs as soon as practicable and, in any event, within 24 hours;
vi. If the property cannot be made safe within the specified timescales for Awaab’s Law, then the social landlord must offer to arrange for the tenant(s) to stay in suitable alternative accommodation until it is safe to return;
vii. The social landlord will be expected to keep clear records of all attempts to comply with the proposals, including records of all correspondence with the tenant(s) and any contractors. If the social landlord makes all reasonable attempts to comply with the timescales but is unable to for reasons genuinely beyond their control, they will be expected to provide a record of the reasons that prevented them from doing so.

10. The consultation was open for 8 weeks, between 9 January and 5 March 2024. Respondents could respond via our online survey, email or by post. The consultation asked 29 questions in total, including questions that invited either a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response, as well as questions inviting further views in a free text box.

11. The consultation followed the consultation principles guidance issued by Cabinet Office. It was accompanied by a consultation stage Impact Assessment. We have now published an updated Impact Assessment, informed by evidence provided to the consultation.

Summary of consultation responses

12. The consultation received 1,028 responses. A breakdown by type of respondent is set out here:

Type of respondent	Number of responses	Proportion of total responses*
Resident of the social rented sector	380	37%
Local authority registered provider	113	11%
Other local authority (not a registered provider)	24	2%
Private registered provider of social housing	140	14%
Other social landlord (not a registered provider)	9	1%
Arms-length management organisation (ALMO)	9	1%
Tenant management organisation (TMO)	4	0.4%
Resident representative group**	48	5%
Landlord representative group**	14	1%
Industry body	13	1%
Charity (not a registered provider)	22	2%
Other	250	24%
Not Answered	2	0.2%

*Where possible percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole number

** Representative groups’ responses will be on behalf of a number (in some cases hundreds) of individuals or organisations. We have reflected their views in the qualitative analysis.  

13. All responses received by the closing date have been considered, and this document provides a summary of those responses. Respondents were not required to answer all the questions in the consultation.

14. A number of respondents submitted their views via the dedicated mailbox but did not follow the questions or sections as set out in the consultation document and online questionnaire. As a result, not all of these responses could be included within the data for specific questions. These have however all been considered as part of the analysis of responses.

15. Responses to closed ‘yes/no’ questions are presented in table format. In reporting the overall response to each ‘yes/no’ question, ‘majority’ means more than 50% of responses and ‘minority’ indicates less than 50%. The percentages of ‘yes/no’ answers have been rounded to the nearest whole number, meaning the total percentages may not always add up to 100%.

16. Responses to free-text questions were analysed to identify common themes and coded where possible to collate similar views and comments. These questions asked respondents to provide further details if they disagreed with a proposal, but the analysis showed that respondents also used these to indicate whether they agreed in full, or with an aspect of the proposal. Key themes or issues are presented to provide a summary of these responses. The following terms have been used in summarising additional points raised in the free-text responses: ‘many’ respondents indicates more than 60% of those answering the relevant question, ‘some respondents’ refers to the range between 20% and 60%, and ‘a few respondents’ means fewer than 20%.

17. Each policy proposal received majority support overall. However, analysis of free-text responses demonstrated concerns with the deliverability of certain aspects of the policy. These concerns have been carefully considered and a breakdown of responses to each consultation question, including concerns raised, is set out below. This document does not attempt to capture every point made and does not respond to comments on aspects of policy that fall outside the scope of the consultation.

18. After analysis of each proposal we have given the government response and explained any changes we will make. The final policy has been informed by the responses to the consultation, and our work with the sector and with tenants to understand issues raised in more detail.

19. Throughout this document ‘social landlord’ refers to registered providers of social housing. This could include a local authority landlord or private registered provider of social housing (such as a housing association). In this document ‘social tenant or ‘tenant’ refers to someone who lives in a home rented from a social landlord. Awaab’s Law covers social housing occupied under a tenancy, with the requirement for landlords to fix hazards which are putting people at significant risk of harm covering anyone living in the home.

The scope of Awaab’s Law

20. The Awaab’s Law campaign called for timescales for social landlords to address damp and mould specifically. As damp and mould are not the only hazards that can harm tenants’ health and safety in social housing, the consultation proposed that Awaab’s Law requirements should apply to all types of hazards covered by the HHSRS, not just damp and mould hazards.

Question 1: Do you agree that Awaab’s Law should apply to all HHSRS hazards, not just damp and mould? 

21. There were 1,014 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	832	81%
No	182	18%
Not Answered	14	1%

22. 81% of total respondents agreed. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 88% of social tenants agreed, and 49% of social landlords agreed with this proposal. The remaining social landlord respondents did not answer this question.

Question 2: Do you agree the right threshold for hazards in scope of Awaab’s Law are those that could pose a significant risk to the health or safety of the resident?  

23. There were 1,012 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	902	88%
No	110	11%
Not Answered	16	2%

24. 88% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 94% of social tenants and 77% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 3: If you have answered ‘no’ to any of the questions in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text).

25. 268 respondents provided a free text response for this section. Respondents acknowledged that the risk of different hazards could vary depending on individual circumstances, which is not always reflected in HHSRS assessments. Some respondents said that Awaab’s Law should not apply to all HHSRS hazards: most of these responses were from social landlords.

26. We heard concerns that including all hazards would be challenging to deliver and could impact social landlords’ ability to respond effectively to significant damp and mould hazards or to deliver their repairs services. Some hazards could be beyond the landlord’s control to address (such as noise or lighting). We also heard that including all hazards would duplicate the HHSRS, and that the HHSRS was outdated and awaiting changes. A few respondents felt that Awaab’s Law should apply to damp and mould only, in line with the campaign. A few felt that certain hazards, such as asbestos, should be excluded as they are already covered by existing legislation. A few respondents also felt that Awaab’s Law should not apply to overcrowding hazards, as this cannot be fixed quickly by repairs.

Government response

Hazards in scope

27. In line with overall support for this proposal, Awaab’s Law will apply to all hazards covered by the HHSRS apart from overcrowding. Damp and mould are not the only hazardous conditions that can harm tenants’ health and safety and therefore protections should be in place for a wider set of hazards.

28. Overcrowding is not usually a result of disrepair and cannot be fixed by repairs or maintenance. We have therefore taken a decision to remove overcrowding from the scope of Awaab’s Law, to ensure that these regulations are focused on repairs issues.  Social landlords will still be expected to take overcrowding issues seriously in line with the Housing Act 1985, and they must continue to address these issues through their transfer and allocation policies. Tenants concerned about overcrowding will be able to go to the Housing Ombudsman, or to their local council if they are the tenant of a housing association.

29. Requirements will be introduced in 3 phases from October 2025. The phased approach will ensure that Awaab’s Law is deliverable and effective in protecting tenants from dangerous hazards. It will allow the time needed for government to ‘test and learn’, evaluate the effectiveness of the systems and processes in place to effectively deliver Awaab’s Law and ensure the policy is effective as it is scaled up. Government will keep the policy actively under review and will bring forward changes ahead of each phase if needed to ensure effective implementation as intended.

• From 27 October 2025, social landlords will have to investigate and take action on all emergency hazards as soon as reasonably practicable and within no longer than 24 hours. They will also be required to address damp and mould hazards that present a significant risk of harm to tenants, within fixed timescales.
• In 2026, we will expand requirements applicable to significant hazards that are not an emergency to apply to a wider range of hazards beyond damp and mould: excess cold and excess heat; falls; structural collapse; fire; electrical and explosions and hygiene hazards. In selecting these hazards for inclusion we considered a number of criteria, including how common they are, likely impact on health and safety, which hazards tenants care about the most, and the cost of repairs compared to their impact.
• Then in 2027, we will expand the requirements to significant hazards relating to the remaining hazards covered by HHSRS, excluding overcrowding.

Definition of hazards in scope of Awaab’s Law

30. Hazards in scope of Awaab’s Law will be defined as “significant hazards” or “emergency hazards” in regulations.

31. To qualify as a “significant hazard” a hazard must pose a significant risk of harm to the health or safety of an occupant. A “significant risk of harm” is defined in regulations as meaning a risk of harm to the occupier’s health or safety that a reasonable landlord would take steps to make safe as a matter of urgency, based on knowledge they should have, or should ask for, about the tenants’ situation.

32. To qualify as an “emergency hazard”, a hazard must pose an imminent and significant risk of harm to the health or safety of an occupant. An “imminent and significant risk of harm” is defined in regulations as meaning a risk of harm to the occupier’s health or safety that a reasonable landlord, with the relevant knowledge, would take steps to make safe within 24 hours.

33. To qualify as a ”significant hazard” or “emergency hazard” a hazard must also result from defects, disrepair, or lack of maintenance in buildings or land for which the social landlord is responsible. This will not include hazards that are the result of a breach of contract on the part of the tenant.

34. Assessment of whether a hazard is in scope will therefore need to be done on a case-by-case basis, taking a person-centred approach that focuses on the tenants’ individual circumstances. Social landlords should use the range of available information to determine whether there is a risk to individual tenants, including Awaab’s Law guidance, HHSRS guidance, information about tenants which they hold or ask for, and other available guidance, including government guidance for landlords on the health risks of damp and mould in housing. If a social landlord receives evidence from third parties (e.g. from medical professionals, social workers, or schools) they must factor this into their assessment of the hazard.

Investigations

Proposal 1. If a social landlord is made aware of a potential hazard in a social home, they must investigate within 14 calendar days to ascertain if there is a hazard.

35. The consultation asked respondents if they agreed that social landlords should have 14 calendar days to investigate hazards, and if they agreed that medical evidence should not be required to inform an investigation under Awaab’s Law.

Question 4: Do you agree with the proposal that social landlords should have 14 calendar days to investigate hazards? (Y/N)

36. There were 1,015 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	829	81%
No	189	18%
Not Answered	13	1%

37. 81% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 87% of social tenants and 67% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 5: Do you agree that medical evidence should not be required for an investigation?  

38. There were 1,013 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	902	88%
No	111	11%
Not Answered	15	1%

39. 88% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 95% of social tenants and 78% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 6: If you have answered ‘no’ to any of the questions in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text).

40. 326 respondents provided a free text response. Some respondents felt that 14 days would be too short to be able to fully investigate a potential hazard, particularly for more complex issues. Most of these were from social landlords with reasons given including a lack of staff and/or contractor capacity. Some respondents felt that 14 days would be too long. These responses were mostly from social tenants who raised concerns that this would leave tenants living in potentially dangerous conditions during this time.

41. Some responses, particularly from social landlords, called for the timescales for investigations to be set out in working days, instead of calendar days.

42. The majority of respondents agreed that medical evidence should not be required for an investigation. Some respondents felt that medical evidence was necessary to effectively triage cases, to prevent false claims or to make sure that landlords took reported cases seriously.

Government response

43. In line with majority of respondents and Awaab’s Law campaigners, we agree that 14 calendar days for investigations is broadly sensible. However, we have been provided with further evidence by the sector on the challenges of setting timescales for repairs in calendar days, especially  the need to renegotiating contracts to cover weekend and out of hours working. Existing legislation (such as the Secure Tenants of Local Housing Authorities (Right to Repair) Regulations 1994) uses working day timescales.

44. We will set timescales for action under Awaab’s Law in working days to ensure deliverability of the legislation. We do not wish to significantly increase the overall timeframes, so we will set the timelines for investigation at 10 working days, with the day the issue is reported counted as day “zero”.

45. The investigation must determine whether there is a significant or emergency hazard. The social landlord will be required to ensure that whoever conducts the investigation, in their judgement, holds the right skills and experience to make this determination (i.e. is a ‘competent investigator’).

46. Awaab’s Law regulations will include four types of investigation;

a. “Standard investigations”: Must be completed within 10 working days of the landlord becoming aware of a potential hazard. The investigation must determine if there is a significant hazard or an emergency hazard. Standard investigations can be conducted remotely or in person, but tenants can request an in-person inspection.

b. “Emergency investigations”: Emergency investigations should take place within 24 hours if the landlord believes that there is an emergency hazard affecting the home. (See below for more detail on emergency hazards).

c. “Renewed investigations”: If a tenant specifically requests an in-person inspection after an investigation has been done remotely and before any preventive work previously identified has been begun, a ‘renewed’ in-person investigation must be carried out.

d. “Further investigations”: Follow up investigations may be required in order to determine what works are required under the Regulations to make the hazard safe and prevent it (as far as possible) from recurring.

47. More than one investigation might be required. For example, the first investigation to be completed with 10 working days may identify that there is damp and mould and that spores need to be removed to make the home safe, but they may be unable to determine the root cause and/or the actions needed to prevent it from recurring without a structural damp survey. Any further investigations must be completed as soon as reasonably practicable, and the tenant must be kept informed.

48. If the landlord has already investigated and the tenant reports the issue again or repeats the complaint, the landlord will only be required to investigate again if there has been a material change. An example of a material change would be, in the case of a falls hazard, if a banister the tenant was concerned about had fallen off the wall altogether.

49. We note concerns around the proposal not to require medical evidence, but we do not consider it proportionate or necessary to require tenants to seek evidence from a regulated healthcare professional to have dangerous issues in their home fixed. Tenants will be under no obligation to provide supporting evidence. However, if a social landlord receives evidence from the tenant or from any third parties (e.g. registered healthcare providers, social workers, or schools) they must take this into account.

Written summaries

Proposal 2: Within 14 calendar days of being made aware that there is a potential hazard in a social home, the social landlord must provide a written summary of findings to the resident that includes details of any hazard identified and (if applicable) next steps, including an anticipated timeline for repair and a schedule of works.

50. The consultation proposed that tenants be issued with a written summary of the findings of the investigation (which should take place with 14 calendar days). The consultation asked respondents if they agreed with the proposal to provide written summaries within 48 hours of the investigation concluding, if they agreed with the proposed information it should include, and if they agreed with the timescale for providing the written summary.

Question 7: Do you agree with the proposal for social landlords to provide a written summary to residents of the investigation findings?  

51. There were 1,013 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	953	93%
No	60	6%
Not Answered	15	1%

52. 93 of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 98% of social tenants and 87% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 8: Do you agree with the minimum requirements for information to be contained in the written report? 

53. There were 1,012 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	920	89%
No	92	9%
Not Answered	16	2%

54. 89% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 95% of social tenants and 83% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 9: Do you agree social landlords should have 48 hours to issue the written summary? 

55. There were 1,010 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	706	69%
No	304	30%
Not Answered	18	2%

56. 69% of total respondents agreed that social landlords should have 48 hours to issue the written summary. However, a breakdown of respondents by group shows that a minority of social landlords agreed with this proposal (24%), compared with 92% of social housing tenants.

Question 10: If you have answered ‘no’ to any of the questions in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text).

57. 371 respondents provided a response in the free text.  Many respondents, the majority of whom were social landlords, raised concerns that 48 hours could be too short for providing the written summaries. Reasons included that the information required was complex and may not be available within 48 hours, that information may be required from third-parties (such as contractors) whose input cannot be guaranteed in a fixed timescale, and that a tight timescale would risk rushed reports of a lower quality. We also heard there would be challenges if an investigation concluded before a weekend or bank holiday, which could result in a need for additional out of hours staff at high costs. Some respondents suggested alternative timescales, which included 3 or 5 working days.

Government response

58. In line with the consultation, Awaab’s Law regulations will require social landlords to provide a written summary of investigation findings.

59. We want written summaries to encourage transparency and understanding between tenants and social landlords. They should ensure that tenants are informed of the issues in their homes and what to expect from their social landlords, so that they are reassured about what work will be carried out or have grounds to challenge if the landlord fails to action required repairs. The written summary will make sure there is an effective record of the investigation, findings, and correspondence with tenants. This will be essential for both landlords and tenants if a legal challenge is made. With this in mind, landlords should ensure they keep records and ensure tenants are kept informed even in circumstances where written summaries are not required.

60. Taking into account concerns set out in the consultation, social landlords will be required to provide tenants with a written summary of investigation findings within 3 working days of the investigation concluding in most circumstances, with the day the investigation concludes counted as day “zero”. This timeframe will ensure there is adequate time for landlords to effectively capture the required information whilst meeting the requirement to provide this information quickly. The timeline will start after the investigation concludes, to take into account that investigations will take varying amounts of time.  This does not alter the timescales for investigations, making homes safe, nor beginning wider repairs and therefore does not impact tenant safety.

61. A written summary will usually be required following any investigation under Awaab’s Law, including emergency investigations. The exception to this will be if all the work to address the hazard is completed before the end of the 3 working days. Social landlords will be required to keep tenants informed about the timing and progress of work until it is completed, and to inform the tenant once work has been completed under Awaab’s Law.

62. We have heard concerns about the level of detail in written summaries. Making written summaries too prescriptive could result in the production of rushed, confusing summaries. Regulations will therefore set simple, outcomes-based requirements. The written summary should include:

• Confirmation of whether or not the issue under investigation is a significant or emergency hazard. If so, the written summary should explain what the hazard is and what action the landlord is required to take. If no action is required it should explain the reason why.
• A target timescale for any required action(s).
• Information on how to contact the social landlord.

63. The written summary can be given by being delivered personally to the tenant, being left at their home, being sent by first class post, or being sent electronically. The written summary is given at the time that it is delivered personally to the tenant, left at their home, sent electronically or posted.

Beginning repair works

Proposal 3: If the investigation indicates that a reported hazard poses a significant risk to the health or safety of the resident, the social landlord must begin repair works within 7 calendar days of the written summary being issued.

64. The consultation asked respondents if they agreed with the timescale for beginning repairs (within 7 calendar days of the written summary being issued), if they agreed that mould spores should be removed as soon as possible, and if they agreed with the definition of ‘beginning’ repair works.

Question 11: Do you agree with the proposal that if an investigation finds a hazard that poses significant risk to the health or safety of the resident, the social landlord must begin to repair the hazard within seven days of the written summary being issued? 

65. There were 1,013 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	850	83%
No	163	16%
Not Answered	15	1%

66. 83% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 92% of social tenants and 67% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 12: Do you agree that in instances of damp and mould, the social landlord should take action to remove the mould spores as soon as possible?

67. There were 1,015 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	947	92%
No	68	7%
Not Answered	13	1%

68. 92% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 96% of social tenants and 89% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 13: Do you agree with the proposed interpretation of ‘begin’ repair works? 

69. There were 1,014 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	862	84%
No	152	15%
Not Answered	14	1%

70. 84% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 91% of social tenants and 77% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 14: If you have answered ‘no’ to any of the questions in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text)

71. 324 respondents provided a free text response. Some respondents, mostly social landlords, felt that 7 calendar days was too short for beginning work to address the hazard. They raised concerns that the timescale could incentivise quick fixes that do not properly address issues, and that it may not be enough time to make sufficient arrangements to begin repair works and/or secure skilled workers. A few respondents, mostly social tenants, noted that the proposed interpretation of ‘begin’ repair works could lead to repairs being started but not completed to a sufficient standard.

72. Some responses, particularly from social landlords, called for the timescales for repairs to be set out in working days, instead of calendar days, for similar reasons to those set out for investigation timelines.

Government response

73. As explained above, we think there is merit in amending timescales for action to be expressed in working days to ensure deliverability of the legislation. However, we do not wish to significantly widen the overall timeframes. We are therefore setting the timeline for making safe and starting additional work (where possible) at 5 working days of the investigation concluding, to be clear that weekend working is not required. The day the investigation concludes will be counted as day “zero”. We have also made a clearer distinction between works to make safe and additional work to address the root cause of hazards, which we know is likely to take longer.

74. The consultation asked specifically about temporary measures to remove mould spores. We consider it necessary to require that homes affected by any significant or emergency hazard(s) are made safe while more in-depth work is undertaken. Although not specified in the consultation, regulations will differentiate between work to ”make safe” and “supplementary preventative work” to ensure, as far as is possible, that the hazard does not recur. For example, in cases where a home is affected by damp and mould, required works could include removal of spores (“make safe”) as well as repairs to a faulty external wall causing penetrating damp (“supplementary preventative work”).

75. Regulations will require that if an investigation concludes a hazard presents a significant risk of harm to the health or safety of the tenant and work is required under the regulations, the social landlord must make the home safe within 5 working days of the investigation concluding.

76. The social landlord must also begin, or if that is not possible take steps towards beginning supplementary preventative works within 5 working days. This could for example be taking steps to book contractors if none are immediately available.  Works should begin as soon as reasonably practicable and within no longer than 12 weeks of the investigation concluding.

77. Required works will be subject to limited exceptions, such as if hazards result from damage by “acts of god” (e.g. fires, storms, floods) from which landlords are already exempt from repairing obligations under existing legislation; if the landlord cannot lawfully carry out the works for any reason, or if the hazard arises from a breach of contract by the tenant.

78. We also considered work that may take longer than the timelines set out in Awaab’s Law, which are intended to apply to hazards which are affecting specific tenants in their individual homes, and the timescales for action have been set with this in mind. Specifically, whilst the remediation of dangerous cladding is a priority for the government, we do not consider Awaab’s Law regulations an appropriate mechanism for securing cladding remediation. The cost and complexity of removing cladding means that it would be impossible for the majority of building owners to meet Awaab’s Law timeframes and we do not believe this is a sensible or proportionate expectation to set.

79. However, we do think it is important that Awaab’s Law provides a mechanism for social tenants to report concerns about dangerous cladding to their social landlords, and sets clear requirements for action whilst cladding is being fixed in the longer term, or tenants be provided with somewhere else safe to live until it’s safe to return to their home.

80. As such, we have drafted the regulations so that tenants can report issues in relation to cladding to their social landlords but landlords will not be required to remediate the unsafe cladding (or do any other cladding work) as part of Awaab’s Law. Requirements to investigate potentially significant or emergency hazards, do any other work required to make the property safe (with interim measures if necessary) and keep residents informed will still apply.

81. This does not mean that social landlords should not be working to remediate unsafe cladding. Registered Providers of social housing are responsible for ensuring their buildings are made safe in a proportionate and timely manner. We expect all social landlords to fully identify and assess relevant housing stock and to remediate unsafe buildings at pace. We are working closely with regulators to ensure these expectations are met. 

82. The government outlined its commitment to accelerating building remediation through the Remediation Acceleration Plan (RAP), published on 3 December 2024. On 11 June as part of the Spending Review, government confirmed over £1 billion of new investment between 2026-27 and 2029- 30 to accelerate the remediation of social housing, by giving social housing providers equal access to government funding as private building owners. This will support providers of social housing to supply more affordable homes, while also improving the living conditions of tenants. We will publish more details on our Social Housing Remediation strategy this summer.

Completing repair works

Proposal 4: The social landlord must satisfactorily complete repair works within a reasonable time period. The resident should be informed of this time period and their needs should be considered.

83. The consultation asked respondents whether they agreed that the social landlord must satisfactorily complete repair works within a reasonable time period. This meant that repairs should not be unreasonably delayed, with evidence provided where delays to repairs were necessary or beyond the landlord’s control. Tenants should be kept informed and their needs considered.

Question 15: Do you agree that the social landlord must satisfactorily complete repair works within a reasonable time period, and that the resident should be informed of this time period and their needs considered?  

84. There were 1,017 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	957	93%
No	60	6%
Not Answered	11	1%

85. There was overall support for this proposal, with 93% of total respondents agreeing. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 96% of social tenants and 93% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 16: If you have answered ‘no’ to the question in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text)

86. 154 respondents provided a response in the free text. Some respondents raised concerns that ‘a reasonable time period’ is too subjective and may mean one thing to a tenant and another to a landlord.

Government response

87. In line with the strong support for this proposal, Awaab’s Law regulations will require that the social landlord must satisfactorily complete repair works within a reasonable time period.

88. As noted in the consultation, we recognise that some hazards will be more complex than others to repair and for this reason believe it would be impractical to set a fixed time limit for the completion of all repairs under Awaab’s Law.  Timescales for the completion of works should reflect the nature of the problem, be proportionate to the scale of the repair, and consider the needs of occupants. For example, repairing heating systems must be treated more urgently during colder weather, and/or tighter timescales may be required for elderly or vulnerable individuals.

89. This requirement is in line with social landlords’ existing obligations under section 9A and 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, which require them to make repairs in a reasonable amount of time and fix issues that make homes unfit for human habitation.

Timescales for emergency repairs

Proposal 5. The social landlord must action emergency repairs as soon as practicable and, in any event, within 24 hours.

90. The consultation asked respondents whether they agreed that timescales for emergency repairs should be set out in legislation.

Question 17: Do you agree that timescales for emergency repairs should be set out in legislation?  

91. There were 974 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	878	85%
No	96	9%
Not Answered	54	5%

92. 85% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 94% of social tenants and 73% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 18: Do you agree that social landlords should be required by law to action emergency repairs as soon as practicable and, in any event, within 24 hours? 

93. There were 1,014 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	882	86%
No	132	13%
Not Answered	14	1%

94. 86% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 96% of social tenants and 72% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 19: If you have answered ‘no’ to any of the questions in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text)

95. 255 respondents provided a free text response. Some respondents, mostly social landlords, felt that 24 hours was too short a timeframe to action some emergency repairs, particularly due to a lack of staff/contractor capacity. A few respondents also raised concerns that this proposal will lead to ‘quick fixes’ rather than quality repairs. A few respondents, mostly social landlords, felt that this proposal was not needed because such requirements are set out in existing legislation and policies.

Government response

96. In line with the strong support for this proposal, regulations will require landlords to investigate and take action on emergency hazards as soon as practicable, and in any event, within 24 hours. If properties cannot be made safe within 24 hours, requirements to secure the provision of suitable alternative accommodation will apply (see below). Although some respondents considered that 24 hours is too short a timeframe, we think this requirement is crucial for tenants’ safety and note that the timescales are in line with many landlords’ existing policies for emergency repairs.

97. An emergency hazard is a hazard that a landlord has reason to believe presents a significant and imminent risk of harm to the health and safety of a tenant. A “significant and imminent risk of harm” is defined as meaning a risk of harm to the occupier’s health or safety that a reasonable landlord would take steps to make safe within 24 hours, based on knowledge they should have, or should ask for, about the tenants’ situation.

98. We recognise that certain types of repairs are also covered by the timescales in other legislation (for example the Secure Tenants of Local Housing Authorities (Right to Repair) Regulations 1994, although these timescales apply to local authority landlords only). Where this is the case, and a repair is already covered by another timescale, the shorter timescale will apply. Mandating emergency repair timescales through Awaab’s Law will ensure social housing tenants are protected regardless of whether they rent from a private social landlord or a local authority social landlord.

99. The requirements to take emergency action are triggered if a landlord becomes aware of a potential hazard and has reason to believe that it is an emergency hazard. This will include if a landlord discovers an issue they believe might be an emergency hazard in the course of another investigation, or if they become aware of a potential emergency hazard another way.

100. Regulations will set out an emergency “action period” of 24 hours, during which time the landlord must investigate the emergency hazard and carry out the work to make it safe. These actions can happen in parallel. If supplementary repair works are required to address the underlying cause of the hazard they must follow the same timelines as for significant (non-emergency) hazards: begin within 5 working days, or if that is not reasonably practicable take steps towards beginning supplementary preventative works within 5 working days, with works needing to begin as soon as reasonably practicable and within no longer than 12 weeks of the investigation concluding.  Landlords should provide tenants with a written summary in this case.

101. As outlined above, we believe this timeframe is both necessary to maintain tenants’ safety, and make sure that full repairs rather than ‘quick fixes’ are achieved, whilst remaining deliverable for social landlords.

Providing suitable alternative accommodation

Proposal 6. In the event that the investigation finds a hazard that poses a significant, or a significant and imminent, risk of harm or danger, and the property cannot be made safe within the specified timescales for Awaab’s Law, the registered provider must offer to arrange for the occupant(s) to stay in suitable alternative accommodation until it is safe to return.

102. The consultation asked respondents whether they agreed that landlords should arrange for tenants to stay in temporary accommodation (at the landlord’s expense) if the property can’t be made safe within the specified timescales.

Question 20: Do you agree that landlords should arrange for residents to stay in temporary accommodation (at the landlord’s expense) if the property can’t be made safe within the specified timescales? 

103. There were 1,014 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	921	90%
No	93	9%
Not Answered	14	1%

104. 86% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. This is made up of 95% of social tenants and 83%% of social landlords.

Question 21: If you have answered ‘no’ to the question in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text)

105. 237 respondents provided a free text response. Some respondents, mostly social landlords, raised concerns that moving tenants to alternative accommodation may not be in the best interest of tenants in all circumstances. Landlords may struggle to move tenants due to the shortage of available alternative accommodation. A few social landlords referenced the cost and resource impact of the proposal.

Government response

106. We agree with the strong support for this proposal that landlords should arrange for tenants to stay in temporary alternative accommodation at the landlord’s expense if the home cannot be made safe within the specified timescales. Regulations will therefore require that, if the landlord is unable to complete work to make the home safe within the timescale, they must secure suitable temporary alternative accommodation before the end of the initial remediation period (5 working days or 24 hours for emergency hazards). The accommodation must last until the home is made safe for tenants to return to (subject to limited exceptions which will be outlined in guidance).

107. The landlord must ensure that works to make the home safe take place as soon as reasonably practicable, to mitigate cases of tenants living in temporary alternative accommodation for extended periods of time.

108. We understand that moving tenants to alternative accommodation may not always be in their best interests and that landlords may face challenges due to shortages of available alternative accommodation. Therefore, we will set out in guidance that landlords may wish to provide alternative options if tenants decline an offer to move. This may include compensation payment (e.g. for moving costs) and covering living costs if tenants wish to stay with family/friends until the home is safe, as an alternative to accommodation provided by the landlord.

109. Tenants should make the ultimate decisions on whether to move into alternative accommodation. They can choose to return to their home at any time, and the requirement for the landlord to provide alternative accommodation will be ended if the tenant notifies the landlord in writing that they do not or no longer want it. If anyone will remain in the home while it is unsafe, the landlord must provide information on how to mitigate the risk of harm, or let the tenant know if they do not think it is possible for them to do anything to mitigate that risk.

110. These requirements apply for anyone who normally lives in the home as part of the tenant’s household and in accordance with the lease, including children who would usually stay overnight for at least one night a week.

Record-keeping 

Proposal 7. The social landlord will be expected to keep clear records of all attempts to comply with the proposals, including records of all correspondence with the resident(s) and any contractors. If the social landlord makes all reasonable attempts to comply with the timescales but is unable to for reasons genuinely beyond their control, they will be expected to provide a record of the reasons that prevented them from doing so.

111. We want any new requirements to be proportionate and deliverable for landlords, whilst achieving the best outcomes for tenants. We recognise that in certain circumstances, fixed time limits will not be possible for landlords to meet for reasons beyond their control. The consultation proposed including in regulations, provision for a defence if landlords have taken all reasonable steps to comply, but it has not been possible for reasons genuinely beyond their control.

Question 22: Do you agree that Awaab’s Law regulations should include provisions for a defence if landlords have taken all reasonable steps to comply with timeframes, but it has not been possible for reasons beyond their control? 

112. There were 1,015 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	919	89%
No	96	9%
Not Answered	13	1%

113. 89% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that 89% of social tenants and 97% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 23: If you have answered ‘no’ to the questions in this section, please provide an explanation (with evidence where possible) and/or an alternative suggestion (free text)

114. 174 respondents provided a free text response. Some respondents, mainly social tenants, raised concerns that landlords may use this defence to avoid meeting responsibilities.

Government response

115. Awaab’s Law includes a provision for a defence if social landlords can prove that they have used all reasonable endeavours to comply with the requirements of the regulations. Landlords will not be liable for a breach of the regulations if they have not been able to comply for reasons genuinely beyond their control. The social landlord should therefore keep clear records of all attempts to comply with the proposals, including records of all correspondence with the tenant(s) and any contractors.

116. This defence does not exempt social landlords from their requirements under Awaab’s Law, or from legal challenge. It will enable social landlords to defend themselves if they face action for a breach of requirements when they have taken all reasonable steps to comply.

117. The provision for defence is contained in the primary legislation for Awaab’s Law (see section 10A(5) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985), and it would not be appropriate to reiterate this provision in regulations, however guidance will make this defence provision clear.

118. Under Awaab’s Law regulations, social landlords will also be protected from repeated and unfounded vexatious claims. Where they have previously conducted an investigation under Awaab’s Law they will only be required to undertake a new investigation where there has been a material change to a matter of which they are already aware.

Impact Assessment

119. A consultation stage Impact Assessment was published to estimate the costs and benefits of the proposals for Awaab’s Law.

120. Social landlords already have a responsibility to maintain their homes to meet the Decent Homes Standard, which specifies homes must be free of category 1 hazards, and to remedy disrepair. They must maintain homes so that they are fit for human habitation, which means they must be safe, healthy and free from things that could cause anyone else in a household serious harm. The consultation Impact Assessment concluded that the duty to make repairs to reported hazards is not a new burden on landlords, and the costs associated with the investigation and repair timescales are likely to be minimal. The additional burden is the speed at which repairs need to be responded to, not the repairs themselves.

121. Costs were monetised for the time taken for providers to familiarise with the regulation changes (PV, £1.6m over 10 years) and for the proposed requirement that a written summary of findings is provided to the tenant. These include preparation and postage costs (PV, £154.5m over 10 years).

122. The consultation asked respondents to feedback on whether they agreed with the assessment that the majority of proposed requirements would create small net additional costs to the sector, whether they agreed with the assessment of the costs associated written summaries, and whether they agreed with the assumptions we made to reach those estimates.

Question 24. Do you agree with the assessment that proposals 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 will create small net additional costs to the sector?

123. There were 1,009 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	741	72%
No	268	26%
Not Answered	19	2%

124. 72% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of respondents by group shows that the majority of social landlords disagreed, whilst 90% of social tenants and 36% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 26: Do you agree with the assessment of the net additional costs of proposal 2?

125. There were 1,004 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	745	72%
No	259	25%
Not Answered	24	2%

126. 72% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A breakdown of responses by group shows that a majority of social landlords disagreed. 92% of social tenants and 36% of social landlords agreed with this proposal.

Question 28. Do you agree with the assumptions we have made to reach these estimates? (Y/N)

127. There were 1,004 responses to this question.

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	743	72%
No	261	25%
Not Answered	24	2%

128. 72% of total respondents agreed with this proposal. A majority of social landlords disagreed with this proposal. 92% of social tenants and 36% of social landlords agreed.

Questions 25, 27 and 29 asked for additional information where respondents did not agree with questions 24, 26 and 28.

129. 303 respondents provided a free text response to this question. Some respondents felt that costs had been underestimated. In particular, some respondents felt that additional costs associated with hiring new staff, contractors and establishing new contracts had not been accounted for. Some respondents also highlighted additional costs associated with establishing new systems and processes. Some respondents felt there had been a lack of detailed investigation and insufficient data underpinning costings, and that cost assessments did not fully consider broader financial pressures on housing providers. Many respondents suggested that the proposals would require additional recruitment and resources, which could create unforeseen financial pressures, particularly for smaller providers or those in rural areas. Fewer social landlords agreed with the cost estimates. Open-text responses from social landlord respondents highlighted concerns that the assumptions underpinning the Impact Assessment had underestimated the cost of proposals.

130. However, there was overall agreement for each question relating to the consultation stage Impact Assessment. Many respondents agreed with the assessment that the majority of the proposals will create small net additional costs to the sector, with the assumptions made, and with the assessment of the costs for written summaries.

131. We have updated the Impact Assessment to reflect that the requirement to carry out repairs at a faster pace may require additional staff for landlords whose internal targets are longer than the timeframes set by Awaab’s Law, focusing on phase 1 of the policy to reflect the regulations being laid alongside this consultation. Consultation responses provided by social landlords enabled us to produce cost estimates for additional staff on a per dwelling basis, estimated at £30 to £80, with a midpoint of £55. To produce sector-wide estimates, per dwelling estimates have been extrapolated across stock covered by the legislation, adjusted to reflect dwelling weighted responses.

132. We have now published the final stage Impact Assessment for Phase 1 of the regulations. The cost of these requirements on social landlords are estimated to be £14.6 million per year over a 10-year appraisal period. The cost impacts fall into the categories of additional staff costs, familiarisation costs and the preparation and postage costs for written summaries. The Impact Assessment covers costs and benefits.

Next steps

133. We have laid regulations in Parliament to bring Phase 1 of Awaab’s Law requirements into force. The regulations will be subject to the affirmative procedure and will need to be approved in both Houses of Parliament before they can be made.

134. Ahead of regulations coming into force in October 2025, social landlords should ensure they are equipped to meet the requirements of Phase 1 of Awaab’s Law. We have published draft guidance to familiarise social landlords with requirements and support with preparedness, and guidance for tenants will be published ahead of the regulations coming into force. Over the coming months, we will continue to work with the sector to test and refine this guidance, and would welcome feedback which can be sent to socialhousingsafety@communities.gov.uk.

135. Under the regulations, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government is required to carry out a review of the regulatory provision contained in the Regulations. The first review must be conducted within 5 years. However, the phased approach also gives us an opportunity to evaluate how the policy is being implemented, and we will take a ‘test and learn’ approach, allowing for flexibility in response to monitoring and evaluation.

Annex A: Hazards within scope of Awaab’s Law

Phase 1 – From 27 October 2025	Damp and mould growth All emergency hazards
Phase 2 - 2026	Excess cold Excess heat Falls associated with baths Falls associated with level surfaces Falls associated with stairs and steps Falls between levels Electrical hazards Fire Explosions Structural collapse and falling elements Domestic hygiene, pests and refuse Food safety Personal hygiene, sanitation and drainage
Phase 3 – 2027	Asbestos and MMF Biocides Carbon Monoxide and fuel combustion products Lead Radiation Un-combusted fuel gas Volatile organic compounds Entry by intruders Lighting Noise Water supply Flames, hot surfaces and materials Collisions and entrapment Ergonomics

More information on these hazards can be found in the HHSRS operating guidance.

Annex B: Example of Awaab’s Law in practice

The below illustration shows how Awaab’s Law could work in practice for a significant damp and mould hazard. Please note this is a hypothetical scenario and simplistic example of how it would play out. This illustration is not reflective of all possible circumstances and should not be relied upon exclusively for understanding the requirements.

Figure 1. Investigations and beginning works

Alt text:
The diagram outlines a hypothetical timeline under Awaab’s Law requirements.

Example Scenario:

There is a significant damp and mould hazard in a property that is caused by a combination of factors, including:

• A lack of an effective damp-proof course
• A broken ventilation system in the bathroom

There is mould in the bathroom and one of the bedrooms and there is a child with asthma living in the property.

Day Zero:

The landlord becomes aware of a potential significant hazard, triggering the start of the 10-working-day investigation period. Since the issue may be a significant hazard, it must be triaged under Awaab’s Law rather than treated as a routine repair. The timescale to investigate (10 days) begins when a landlord becomes aware of a potential hazard.

Day Eight:

In this example, the investigation concludes on Day 8, which is within the required 10-working-day investigation period.

From this point, the following timeframes begin:

5 working days to:

• Make the property safe
• Begin or take steps to begin supplementary works 3 working days to:
• Provide a written summary of the investigation and its conclusion

In this example, make safe work would be to remove the immediate danger (mould spores) by applying a mould treatment.

Supplementary works in this scenario would include: installing a damp proof course and installing new ventilation.

‘Taking steps to begin works’ could be taking action such as making an appointment with damp and ventilation specialists.

If not possible to physically begin relevant safety works within 5 working days, they must begin as soon as reasonably practicable and no later than 12 weeks from the investigation concluding.