Accredited official statistics

English Housing Survey 2023 to 2024: understanding housing circumstances - a multivariate analysis

Published 17 July 2025

Applies to England

Introduction

The English Housing Survey (EHS) is a national survey of people’s housing circumstances and the condition and energy efficiency of housing in England. It is one of the longest standing government surveys and was first run in 1967. This report provides the findings from the 2023-24 survey.

This report

Analysis from the English Housing Survey (EHS) has consistently shown that housing circumstances and the physical condition of the home vary according to the socio-demographic characteristics of the household and the person responsible for the accommodation (the Household Reference Person or HRP). See Headline report. 

However, it can be difficult to determine what, precisely, is driving the variation because households have multiple intersecting characteristics. For example, minority ethnic groups tend to have a younger age profile than the white British population. As younger age groups are also more likely to rent rather than own their home, the differences in tenure by ethnicity may, in part, be due to differences in the age profile between ethnic groups. The relationship between these characteristics needs to be considered when understanding the factors associated with variations in housing circumstances.

To better understand this variation, this report uses multivariate analysis to explore the factors related to different housing circumstances, while taking account of their relationship with each other, and describes the way they are linked to the circumstances of households.

Two sets of findings are presented. The first identifies the factors associated with housing circumstances and ranks the strength of the associations. The second describes the way these factors are linked to the housing circumstances using odds ratios. We aimed to include all relevant predictors of interest in the models to provide a comprehensive analysis. The following categorical variables were included in all models: age of HRP, ethnicity of HRP, gender of HRP, socio-economic group of the HRP, household income and whether anyone in the household had a long-term illness or disability. The EHS uses the eight-class version of the National Statistics Socio-economic Classification (NS-SEC). The methodology used is summarised in the technical annex of this report.

Odds are defined as the probability that an event will occur for one category divided by the probability that it will occur for the reference category

In this report, Chapter 1 examines the factors associated with new and future homeowners. Chapter 2 explores factors associated with housing quality and conditions, including living with damp, living in a non-decent home and living with overcrowding. Chapter 3 looks at aspects of well-being, sense of security of tenure and satisfaction.

Main findings

Factors associated with new and future homeowners

New homeowners

Households living in leasehold properties were more likely to be recent first-time buyers than those living in freehold properties.

• When compared with other owner occupiers, being a recent first-time buyer was associated most strongly with using savings towards a home purchase, purchasing a home with a 100% mortgage and the HRP being in a younger age group.
• Factors found to be moderately associated with being recent first-time buyers include leasehold/freehold status, region of residence and ethnic origin of HRP.
• Households living in the East Midlands, the East, South East and South West were less likely to be recent first-time buyers than households in London.
• Households where the HRP was of black, mixed, or ‘other’ Asian ethnicity were more likely to be recent first-time buyers than households with a HRP of white ethnicity.

The factors most strongly associated with whether a household expected to own a home in the future were the age of the HRP, the absence of someone with a long-term illness or disability in the household and the HRP’s socio-economic group.

• Households with a HRP who was black or identified as ‘any other Asian’ ethnic group were more likely to say they expected to own a home in the future than households with a white HRP.
• Compared to one person households, households made up of a couple with no dependent children, a couple with dependent children and other multi-person households were more likely to expect to own a home.
• Households in the North West and Yorkshire and the Humber more likely to say they expected to own a home than those in London.

The factors associated with the quality and condition of housing

Households with higher weekly rent were less likely to live in non-decent homes. The odds of living in a non-decent home for those in the first quintile (lowest) for weekly rent were almost twice as high compared with households in the top quintile for weekly rent.

• Of the factors considered, tenure was most strongly associated with living in both a non-decent home and a home with damp. Households living in private rented accommodation were more likely to live in a non-decent home, compared to those living in social rented accommodation.
• Compared to households where the HRP was aged 65 years or over, households where the HRP was aged 35 to 64 years were more likely to be living with damp in their home.

Household type was most predictive of living in an overcrowded household for those in the PRS and SRS. Other strongly associated factors were tenure and the socio-economic group of the HRP.

• Private renting households were less likely to be living in overcrowded accommodation than social renting households.
• Households where the HRP was in the intermediate or routine socio-economic groups were more likely to live in overcrowded accommodation compared to households where the HRP was in the higher socio-economic group.
• Overcrowding was more likely in households with at least one member with a long-term illness or disability.

Factors associated with well-being, security and satisfaction

HRPs aged 65 or older were nearly 3 times more likely to feel secure in their tenure in private rented accommodation.

• Income was another factor associated with feeling secure in the private rented sector (those with a higher income were more likely to feel secure).
• Private rented households containing someone with a disability were also less likely to feel secure in their tenure.
• Across all tenures, households that contained someone with a long-term illness or disability were less likely to say their well-being was higher than average. Tenure was also a strong predictor, with owner occupiers more likely to have a higher-than-average well-being rating than those in the rented sectors.

For private and social renters, the presence of someone with a long-term illness or disability in the household was strongly associated (ranked in the top 3 factors) with considering making a complaint to their landlord.

• For private renters, living in a non-decent home and the presence of damp in the home was also strongly associated with considering a complaint.
• Households with a HRP with a black ethnic background were more likely to report they had considered making a complaint than households with a HRP with a white ethnic background.
• Compared to households where the HRP had a white ethnic background, households with a HRP with a black ethnic background were more likely report they made a complaint.
• For social renters, other factors strongly associated with considering a complaint were the presence of damp in the home and age of the HRP (with younger households more likely to consider a making complaint).

Acknowledgements and further queries

Each year the English Housing Survey relies on the contributions of a large number of people and organisations. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) would particularly like to thank the following people and organisations, without whom the 2023-24 survey and this report, would not have been possible: all the households who gave up their time to take part in the survey, The National Centre for Social Research (NatCen), the Building Research Establishment (BRE) and CADS Housing Surveys.

This report was produced by Monica Bennett, Joanna White, Ekaterina Khriakova and Benjamin Ruisch at NatCen, in collaboration with Samuel Offler at MHCLG.

If you have any queries about this report, would like any further information or have suggestions for analyses you would like to see included in future EHS reports, please contact ehs@communities.gov.uk.

The responsible analyst for this report is: Samuel Offler, Data, Analysis, Statistics and Surveys Division, MHCLG. Contact via ehs@communities.gov.uk.

1. Factors associated with new and future homeowners

This chapter explores the factors associated with first-time buyers and renters expecting to buy a home in the future. The analysis takes into account the relationships between different personal, household and property-related characteristics to better understand what factors influence the two outcomes.

First-time buyers

Recent first-time buyers are defined as households that have purchased a property that is their main home in the last three years and have not previously owned a property. See the glossary for further information.

Of the factors included in the analysis, the three factors most strongly associated with a household being a recent first-time buyer were: the use of savings towards the purchase of the home, purchasing it solely with a mortgage and the age of the HRP (younger HRPs were more likely to be recent first-time buyers). Other factors found to be associated with being a recent first-time buyer include receiving a gift/loan from family, household income, socio-economic group of the HRP, leasehold/freehold status, region of residence, ethnic origin of HRP and household type, Annex Table 1.1. See the glossary for further information.

After taking into account all factors in the model, some factors were linked to a higher likelihood of being a recent first-time buyer while others tended to be associated with a lower likelihood. For example, among owner occupiers (see Annex Table 1.2 for odds ratios):

• younger HRPs (25 to 54 years) were more likely to be recent first-time buyers than older HRPs (65 or over) (Figure 1.1)
• households who had received a gift/loan from their family to help purchase their house were more likely to be recent first-time buyers than those who had not
• households in higher income quintiles were less likely to be recent first-time buyers than those in the lowest income quintile
• households where the HRP was in ‘lower’ socio-economic groups (routine or intermediate occupation) were more likely to be recent first-time buyers than households where the HRP was in the highest socio-economic group
• households living in leasehold properties had odds of being a recent first-time buyers that were 41% higher than those living in freehold properties
• households living in the East Midlands, the East, South East and South West were less likely to be recent first-time buyers than households in London
• households where the HRP was of black, mixed, or ‘other’ Asian ethnicity were more likely to be recent first-time buyers than households with a HRP of white ethnicity
• compared with couples with no dependent children, households made up of a lone parent with dependent children were less likely to be recent first-time buyers

Figure 1.1: Odds ratios and confidence intervals for being a recent first-time buyer by age, 2023-24

^{Base: property owners
Note: The results shown are for age of HRP. The dots represent the odds ratios; the odds ratio is an estimate of how many times greater someone’s odds of being a recent first-time buyer were if they were in different age groups under 65 relative to those aged 65 or over. An odds ratio above 1 indicates an increase (for example, an odds ratio of 2 indicates that the odds of someone being a recent first-time buyer were two times greater if they are in that group than if they are not), while a ratio of below 1 indicates a decrease in the odds of being a recent first-time buyer. The teal coloured dots indicate a statistically significant difference compared to the reference group. These findings control for all of the factors listed in Annex Table 1.1.
Source: English Housing Survey, full household sample}

Future homeowners

In 2023-24, 57% of private renters and 25% of social renters said they expected to buy a property at some point in the future (see Headline Report, Annex Table 3.4).

Of the factors included in the analysis, the three most strongly associated with whether a household reported they expected to buy a home in the future were the age of the HRP, whether or not a household member was long-term sick or disabled and the socio-economic group. Tenure, household income, ethnicity of HRP, household type and region of residence were also predictive of whether a household was expecting to own a home in the future, Annex Table 1.3.  

While some factors were linked to a higher likelihood of expecting to own a home in the future, others tended to be associated with a lower likelihood. For example, see Annex Table 1.4 for odds ratios, which will provide further detail on the relationship and likelihood for each factor):

• households with younger HRPs (aged 16-64 years) were more likely to expect to become homeowners than those with older HRPs (aged 65 or over)
• households that had a member with a long-term illness or disability had odds of stating they expect to become homeowners that were 35% lower than households where no members had a long-term illness or disability
• households with a HRP in ‘higher’ socio-economic groups (a higher or intermediate occupation) were more likely to state they expected to become future homeowners than those in routine or manual occupations
• private renters had odds of stating they expect to become homeowners that were 46% higher than social renters
• those in higher income quintiles were more likely to expect to be future homeowners than those in the lowest income quintile
• households with a HRP of black or ‘any other Asian’ ethnic origin were more likely to state they expected to become a homeowner than those of white ethnic origin
• compared with one person households, households made up of a couple with no dependent children, a couple with dependent children and other multi-person households were more likely to expect to become homeowners
• households in the North West and Yorkshire and the Humber more likely to say they expected to become homeowners than those in London

2. The factors associated with the quality and condition of housing

This chapter focuses on the factors associated with three indicators of housing quality: living in a non-decent home, a damp home, or an overcrowded home. The analysis accounts for the relationship between different personal, household and property-related factors. Only private and social renters are included in these analyses, given the low prevalence of these conditions in owner occupied households.

Living in a non-decent home

For a home to be considered ‘decent’ it must: meet the current minimum standard for housing; provide a reasonable degree of thermal comfort; be in a reasonable state of repair; and have reasonably modern facilities and services. See glossary for further information.

Of the factors considered, tenure was the most associated with living in a non-decent home, Annex Table 2.1. The other top ranked factors associated with living in a non-decent home included weekly rent and dwelling type.

Factors less strongly associated with living in a non-decent home included the age of the HRP and region of residence.

After taking account of all the factors covered in this chapter, some factors were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of living in a non-decent home, while others tended to be linked to a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 2.2 for odds ratios):

• households living in private rented accommodation were more likely to live in a non-decent home, compared to those living in social rented accommodation
• households with higher weekly rent were less likely to live in non-decent homes. The odds of living in a non-decent home for those in the first quintile (lowest) for weekly rent were almost twice as high compared with households in the top quintile for weekly rent
• compared with medium/large terraced houses those living in semi-detached houses were less likely to be living in non-decent homes, whereas those living in converted flats were more likely to be living in non-decent homes
• compared with renters living in London, households living in Yorkshire and the Humber had almost double the odds of living in a non-decent home

Living in a damp home

In the EHS, a home is considered to have a problem with damp if the surveyor records damp which is significant enough to be taken into consideration when making a Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) risk assessment, with minor issues of damp not recorded. See the glossary for further information.

Of the factors included in the analyses, and as found with non-decent homes, tenure was the factor most strongly associated with living in a home with damp, Annex Table 2.3.

The two other top ranked factors associated with living in a damp home were whether a household member had a long-term illness or disability and household income.

Other factors that were less strongly associated with living in a damp home were age of the HRP and socio-economic group of HRP.

After taking account of all the factors covered in this chapter, some factors were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of living in a home with damp, while others were linked to a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 2.4 for odds ratios):

• private renters were more likely to live in a damp home compared to social renters
• households without a member with a long-term illnesses or disability were less likely to live in damp home compared to households with one or more members long-term sick/disabled
• households in the highest quintile for household income had odds that were 74% lower than those with the lowest income to live in accommodation with damp
• households where the HRP was in the intermediate socio-economic group, such as shopkeepers, paramedics, and police officers, were less likely to live in homes with damp compared to households where the HRP was in the routine/manual socio-economic group
• compared to households where the HRP was aged 65 years or over, households where the HRP was aged 35 to 64 years were more likely to be living with damp in their home (Figure 2.1)

Figure 2.1: Odds ratios and confidence intervals for living with damp by age, 2023-24

^{Base: all private and social renters
Note: The results shown are for age of HRP. The dots represent the odds ratios; the odds ratio is an estimate of how many times greater someone’s odds of living with damp were if they were in different age groups under 65 relative to those aged 65 or over. An odds ratio above 1 indicates an increase (for example, an odds ratio of 2 indicates that the odds of someone living with damp were two times greater if they are in that group than if they are not), while a ratio of below 1 indicates a decrease in the odds of living with damp. The teal coloured dots indicate a statistically significant difference compared to the reference group. These findings control for all of the factors listed in Annex Table 2.2.
Source: English Housing Survey, full household sample}

Living in an overcrowded home

Households are said to be overcrowded if they have fewer bedrooms available than the notional number needed, according to the bedroom standard definition. Further information about the bedroom standard can be found in the glossary. Due to a small sample size, analyses are based on three years of data

Of the factors considered, household type was most strongly associated with living in an overcrowded home, Annex Table 2.5.

Other top ranked factors associated with living in an overcrowded home were tenure and socio-economic group of HRP.

Factors that were ranked lower for association with living in an overcrowded home were whether or not a household member had a long-term sickness or disability, the ethnic origin of the HRP and the region of residence.

After taking account of all the factors covered in this chapter, some factors were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of living in overcrowded accommodation, while others tended to be linked to a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 2.6 for odds ratios):

• households consisting of a couple with dependent children, lone parents with dependent children and other multi-person households were more likely to live in overcrowded accommodation compared to couples with no dependent children (Figure 2.2a).
• private renting households were less likely to be living in an overcrowded home than social renting households (Figure 2.2b).
• households where the HRP was in the intermediate or routine socio-economic groups were more likely to live in an overcrowded home compared to households where the HRP was in the higher socio-economic group (Figure 2.2c).
• overcrowding was more likely in accommodation with at least one member with a long-term illness or disability
• households with a HRP of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, other Asian or black ethnic origin were more likely to be living in an overcrowded home than households with a HRP of white ethnic origin
• compared to London, households living in the North East, North West, Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands, East and the South East were less likely to live in overcrowded accommodation

Figure 2.2a: Odds ratios and confidence intervals for living in overcrowded  households by household type, 2023-24

Figure 2.2b: Odds ratios and confidence intervals for living in overcrowded households by tenure, 2023-24

Figure 2.2c: Odds ratios and confidence intervals for living in overcrowded households by socio-economic group of HRP, 2023-24

^{Figures 2.2a, 2.2b and 2.2c Base: all private and social renters
Note: The dots represent the odds ratios; for each factor, the odds ratio is an estimate of how many times greater someone’s odds of living in overcrowded households were if they are a particular demographic relative to the reference group (first group shown for each factor). An odds ratio above 1 indicates an increase (for example, an odds ratio of 2 indicates that the odds of someone living in over-occupied households were two times greater if they are in that demographic than if they are in the reference group), while a ratio of below 1 indicates a decrease in the odds of living in over-occupied households. The teal coloured dots indicate a statistically significant difference compared to the reference group. These findings control for all of the factors listed in Annex Table 2.3.
Source: English Housing Survey, full household sample}

3. Factors associated with well-being, security and satisfaction

This chapter explores the factors associated with well-being, security and satisfaction with accommodation. The analysis takes into account the relationship between different personal, household and property-related factors to better understand what influences these outcomes.

This chapter considers householders’ reported well-being, taken from questions asking respondents to report their scores against several measures of well-being. It then moves onto look at those households who are privately renting their accommodation and their reported feelings of security of tenure. Finally, complaints amongst private renters are analysed.

To produce an indexed measure for householders’ security of tenure and well-being from the questions asked, only cases with valid values for all questions were included. Full details are given in the technical annex.

Well-being

Well-being is measured by asking respondents how satisfied they were with their life, to what extent they feel things they do are worthwhile, how happy they felt yesterday, and how anxious they felt yesterday. Respondents indicate a response on a scale of 0 (not at all satisfied) to 10 (completely satisfied). This was turned into a binary outcome for analyses, with a score of the median or above being used to create an ‘average or above well-being’ category, and then a ‘below average well-being’ category. Full details are in the technical annex.

Of the factors considered (for all tenures), whether or not a household member had a long-term illness or disability was most strongly associated with a lower-than-average sense of well-being, Annex Table 3.1.

The other top two ranked factors associated with an average or above average sense of well-being were the age of the HRP and tenure. Other factors that were found to be associated with an average or above average sense of well-being were household type, household income and region of residence.

After taking account of all the factors covered in this chapter, particular factors were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of having an average or above average sense of well-being, while others tended to be linked to a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 3.2 for odds ratios):

• households with one or more people with a long-term illness or disability were less likely to have a HRP with an average or higher well-being, compared to households with no members with a long-term illness or disability
• households with younger HRPs (aged 16-24 years old) had odds of having an average or higher well-being that were 55% lower than HRPs aged 65 or over
• private or social renting HRPs were less likely to report an average or higher well-being than owner occupiers
• for households made up of a couple with no dependent children, a couple with dependent children or a lone parent with dependent children, it was more likely the HRP reported an average or higher well-being compared to those in one person households
• compared to HRPs in households in the lowest income quintile, HRPs in higher income households (second, fourth and fifth income quintiles) were more likely to report average or higher well-being
• HRPs in households in the North West were more likely to report average or above well-being than HRPs in London

Security of tenure

To assess private renters’ opinions on their security of tenure, four questions were used in this analyses. These questions asked about feeling safe from eviction, feeling secure enough to feel confident making long-term decisions about life, feeling invested in the community and feeling like where they live feels like home. Responses were grouped into categories ‘average or above sense of security’ and ‘below average sense of security’. Full details are given in the technical annex

Of the factors considered (for private renters only), whether or not a household member had a long-term illness or disability was most strongly associated with security of tenure, Annex Table 3.3. The other top two factors associated with security of tenure were household income and age of the HRP.

Other factors that were not as strongly linked with security of tenure were: the ethnicity of the HRP, region of residence and dwelling type.

After taking account of all the factors included in the analysis, some factors were associated with a higher likelihood of an average or above average sense of security of tenure, while others were linked to a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 3.4 for odds ratios):

• households with one or more members with a long-term illness or disability were less likely to have an average or above average sense of security of tenure , compared to households with no members with a long-term illness or disability
• compared to households in the lowest income quintile, households in the highest two income quintiles were more likely to have a HRP with an average or above average sense of security of tenure
• households with a HRP of aged 65 or over were almost three times more likely to have an average or above sense of security than households with a HRP aged 25-34
• compared to households with an HRP with a white ethnic background, households with a HRP with a Chinese ethnic background were nearly six times more likely to have an average or above average sense of security of tenure. Households with a HRP reporting an ethnicity of ‘other (not listed)’ were half likely to have an above average sense of security of tenure
• households in the North West, Yorkshire and the Humber and the East were more likely to have an average or above average sense of security of tenure than households in London
• households living in medium/large terraced houses and converted flats were more likely to have an average or above average sense of security of tenure than households living in purpose built flats (low rise)

Complaints

The EHS asks respondents who are renting their accommodation whether they have considered making a complaint. It follows up with a question about whether they did make a complaint. Complaints can be made to a landlord or letting agent for private renters, and to a landlord or tenant management organisation for social renters.

Complaints – private renters

Considering making a complaint

Of those investigated, the top three factors associated with private renters considering a complaint were: whether or not a household member had a long-term illness or disability, presence of damp in the home or not and whether the home was considered decent or not Other factors that were associated with considering a complaint were the age of the HRP, the ethnicity of the HRP, the dwelling type, followed by the region of residence, Annex Table 3.5.

After taking account of all the factors in the analysis, some were associated with a higher likelihood of having considered a complaint, while others were associated with a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 3.6 for odds ratios):

• households with at least one member with a long-term illness or disability were more likely to report they considered making a complaint, compared to households with no members with a long-term illness or disability
• households living in non-decent homes were more likely to report they considered making a complaint than households living in decent homes
• households with a damp problem were more likely to have considered making a complaint than households living in homes with no damp present
• households with a HRP aged 45 or over were less likely to have considered making a complaint than households with a HRP aged 25-34
• households with a HRP from a black ethnic group had odds that were 2.6 times higher to report they had considered making a complaint, compared to households with a HRP from a white ethnic group
• households living in bungalows were more likely to have considered making a complaint than households living in purpose built flats (low rise)
• households living in the North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, West Midlands and the East were less likely to report they had considered making a complaint than households living in London

Making a complaint

Of the factors investigated, the top three factors associated with private renters reporting they had made a complaint were: whether or not a household member had a long-term illness or disability, presence of damp in the home or not and whether the home was considered decent. Another factor associated with having made a complaint was the ethnicity of the HRP, Annex Table 3.7.

After taking account all factors covered in this chapter, some were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of having made a complaint to the landlord or letting agent while others were associated with a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 3.8 for odds ratios):

• households with one or more members with a long-term illness or disability were more likely to have made a complaint compared to households with no members with a long-term illness or disability
• households with damp in the home were more likely to have made a complaint than households with no damp present. Similarly, households living in non-decent homes were more likely to have made a complaint than households living in decent homes
• compared to households with an HRP from a white ethnic group, households with a HRP from a black ethnic group were more likely report they had made a complaint

Complaints – social renters

Considering making a complaint

Of the factors investigated, the top three associated with social renters reporting they had considered making a complaint were: the presence of damp in the home or not, whether a household member had a long-term illness or disability and the age of the HRP. Other factors associated with considering making a complaint were the region of residence, time spent in the dwelling and whether the home was considered decent or not, Annex Table 3.5.

After taking account of all the factors covered in this chapter, some factors were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of having considered making a complaint to the landlord or tenant management organisation, while others tended to be associated with a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 3.6 for odds ratios):

• social renting households with damp present in the home were more likely to have considered making a complaint than households with no damp present. Similarly, households living in non-decent homes were more likely to have considered making a complaint than households living in decent homes.
• households with one or more members with a long-term illness or disability were more likely to report they had considered making a complaint, compared to households with no members with a long-term illness or disability
• younger HRP households aged between 25 to 64 years, were more likely to have considered making a complaint than households with a HRP aged 65 years or over
• households living in the North East, North West, Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands, West Midlands and the South West were less likely to have considered making a complaint than households living in London
• compared to households who had lived in their homes for 20 years or more, households who lived in their homes for 3-4 years were less likely to consider making a complaint. Conversely, those who lived in their homes for 10-19 years were more likely to consider complaining (Figure 3.1).

Figure 3.1: Odds ratios and confidence intervals for social renters who considered making a complaint by time spent in dwelling, 2023-24

^{Base: all social renters
Note: The results shown are for time spent in dwelling. The dots represent the odds ratios; the odds ratio is an estimate of how many times greater someone’s odds of making a complaint were if they had lived in their home for different lengths of time. An odds ratio above 1 indicates an increase (for example, an odds ratio of 2 indicates that the odds of someone making a complaint were two times greater if they are in that group than if they had lived there for more than 20 years), while a ratio of below 1 indicates a decrease in the odds of making a complaint. The teal coloured dots indicate a statistically significant difference compared to the reference group. These findings control for all of the factors listed in Annex Table 3.6.
Source: English Housing Survey, full household sample}

Making a complaint

Of the factors investigated, the top three associated with social renters reporting they made a complaint were: whether or not a household member had a long-term illness or disability, the presence of damp in the home and age of the HRP. Other factors associated with making a complaint were: whether the home was considered decent or not, the region of residence, the socio-economic group of the HRP and time spent in the dwelling, Annex Table 3.7.

After taking account of all the factors covered in the analysis, some were found to be associated with a higher likelihood of having made a complaint to the landlord or tenant management organisation while others tended to be associated with a lower likelihood. For example (see Annex Table 3.8 for odds ratios):

• households with damp present in the home were more likely to have made a complaint than households with no damp present
• households with at least one member with a long-term illness or disability were more likely to have made a complaint than households with no members with a long-term illness or disability
• generally, younger HRP households (25 to 54 years) were more likely to make a complaint than households with a HRP aged 65 or over
• households living in non-decent homes were more likely to report they made a complaint than households living in decent homes
• households living in the North East, North West, Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands, West Midlands and the South West were less likely to report they made a complaint compared households living in London
• compared to households who spent 20 years or more in their dwelling, those who spent 3-4 years in their home were less likely to make a complaint. Those who had spent 10-19 years in their home were more likely to report making a complaint.
• compared to households with a HRP in a routine or manual occupation, households with a HRP in an intermediate occupation were less likely to make a complaint

Overall, there are similarities between the profile of social and private renters who considered and made a complaint. However, there are some differences between the two tenures. In particular for those considering and, to a lesser extent, actually making a complaint, time spent in dwelling was an associated factor for social renters only. For private renters, the ethnic origin of HRP was an factor for considering and making a complaint. For both private and social renters, region was associated with considering making a complaints, but for actually making a complaint it was an associated factor for social renters only.