Understanding criminality in the private rented sector and co-producing solutions
This project began in April 2023 and finished in December 2025. The project used Yorkshire and the Humber (Y&H) as a case study region. The fifteen constituent local authorities have varied economic and social demographics, with concentrations of high deprivation and low-demand housing. In 2023/4, Y&H had the highest crime rate of all English regions. The local authorities varied in their degree of proactivity in terms of housing enforcement.
All qualitative respondents were sent a work package (WP)-specific information sheet, with consent secured in writing or in some cases verbally. Within the reports, all participants are identified with a unique code. Verbatim quotations are given in italics. All the four principal grey reports published in December 2025 draw on information from each WP.
This project was completed by a team of researchers, with Kit Colliver (York Law School) employed to deliver elements of WP3 and WP4, and Loren Parton (University of Sheffield) delivering elements of WP1, WP2 and WP4. Geoff Page (University of York) and Georgios Antonopoulos (Northumbria University) made substantial contributions to WP1. The research also drew on the expertise of Safer Renting staff Roz Spencer, Ben Reeve-Lewis, Isobel Langdale, David Scully and Joey Carr.
WP1: Criminal landlord behaviour and the policing response
(Lead: Xavier L’Hoiry, University of Sheffield)
WP1 focused on identifying the criminal behaviours that are associated with letting property. WP1 research involved qualitative data collection in the form of interviews. Interviews were analysed descriptively with NVivo 12 and further thematic analysis identified. Ethics approval for this WP was secured from the Department of Sociological Studies Ethics Committee, University of Sheffield.
Qualitative data
Interviews with law enforcement and other practitioners
Across the WP, 49 interviews were carried out with practitioners working in the Y&H region. A combination of purposive and snowball sampling was deployed to recruit participants. Purposive sampling was used to target practitioners with experience of intervening with criminality taking place in the PRS. The research team drew on existing professional networks with police forces in the first phase of participant recruitment. In the second phase of recruitment, snowball sampling was used to ask interview participants to connect the team with additional potential participants. This resulted in 37 interviews carried out with police practitioners across the four forces in Y&H. Of these, 28 were officers/staff working with local forces, seven were Regional Organised Crime Unit officers/staff and two interviewees held national roles. The WP sought to capture a range of police ranks (from Police Constable through to Detective Chief Inspector) and roles (frontline and management). Moreover, a further five interviews were carried out with heads of community safety partnerships in Y&H and seven interviews with representatives from local authorities in Y&H with a specific focus on criminality (e.g.: Serious and Organised Crime Coordinators). Interviews were conducted between July 2023 and March 2024.
Interviews with landlords
The WP also sought to gain insights into why landlords engage in criminality. A purposive sampling strategy was used to target landlords who were aware they had committed illegal or potentially illegal acts. Recruiting such participants proved to be very challenging and time consuming. The research team initially approached known contacts in law enforcement and local authorities for potential leads to participants. This yielded one participant. The research team also reviewed media reports of landlord prosecutions and contacted over 20 of these landlords via social media to invite them to interview. This was not successful and several of these individuals ‘blocked’ the research team online. The most successful recruitment method proved to be an open invitation posted on social media groups dedicated to landlords as well as a specialist landlord website in the UK. These invitations yielded 24 responses, and once potential participants contacted the project team, pre-interview discussions were held to ensure that participants were fully aware the study was focused on landlords’ illegal behaviours. In total, 17 interviews were carried out as seven potential participants did not respond following initial exchange of emails/messages. One interview was subsequently discounted as it was clear that the participant had not broken the law.
All but two interviews across the WP were audio recorded and transcripts were produced. For the two non-audio recorded interviews, detailed notes were made. Transcripts and notes were anonymised as per the ethical protocol of the WP, with further review to identify information that was then redacted to ensure anonymity.
WP2: Examining and learning from the most effective solutions
(Lead: Julie Rugg, University of York)
Dealing with criminal behaviour in the private rented sector is the responsibility of organisations including the police, environmental health professionals, trading standards officers and tenancy relations officers. This work package explored local authority perspectives on criminal landlord behaviour and sought to disseminate examples of best practice. All the interviews were transcribed, and analysis was undertaken using a thematic grid. Ethical approval for this WP was secured from the Social Policy and Social Work Ethics Committee at the University of York.
Qualitative data
Interviews with local authorities and other practitioners
This work package used qualitative data collection across all fifteen local authorities in Y&H, using existing contacts to secure a contact for each local authority. This resulted in interviews with 30 PSH professionals, sixteen homelessness team members, four trading standards officers (at local and regional levels) and three professionals from other agencies. These interviews were completed in stages, from the summer of 2023 to the winter of 2024. One further formal interview was conducted with a PSH professional working in an authority outside the region, to secure further information on innovation in its operational practice.
An attempt was made to complete formal interviews with other statutory agencies operating at national and regional levels including the Department for Work and Pensions, the Gangmaster Labour Abuse Authority, HMRC and the Immigration Agency but none of these agencies supplied a respondent.
RIAMS workshops
The WP used the RIAMS network which supports professionals working in environmental health to disseminate best practice via online workshops. These workshops were recorded and made available via a dedicated section within the RIAMS website. Thirteen recordings were made available on subjects including local authority strategies for tackling criminal landlords; information sharing between trading standards and private housing environmental health teams; presenting evidence at residential property tribunals; use of banning orders; use of interim management orders; cuckooing; safeguarding and brothel closures; rent-to-rent scams; defending against CPN appeals; effective approaches to prosecution for illegal eviction; the Cannabis Grow Aware scheme; tackling modern-day slavery; and recovering rent and fines from criminal landlords including use of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA).
WP3: Housing justice
(Lead: Caroline Hunter, York Law School)
WP3 sought to explore how do local authorities decide to take legal action under their housing powers against criminal landlords and work the courts in those cases. The research involved a range of primarily qualitative data with a smaller element of quantitative data. The interviews for the case study authorities were analysed descriptively with NVivo 12 and further thematic analysis identified. All other interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Ethics approval for this WP was secured from the Economics, Law, Management, Politics and Sociology (ELMPS) Ethics Committee, University of York. All respondents were sent a WP information sheet, and consent was secured.
Qualitative data
Case study authorities - case tracking and interviews
For the research the Project followed four local authority private sector housing services within the Y&H region. The teams of three of the authorities (FGF, HIH, BCB) were primarily involved in housing standards work. The fourth team (MNM) was focused on illegal eviction and harassment. Activities included analysing current or recent case files of housing offences on the upper end of severity (n=29) , conducting longitudinal practice-level interviews with case leads over an 18-month period, and strategic-level interviews with heads of service (n=4) and local authority lawyers (n=3). The analysis identified commonalities and differences in enforcement strategy and practice and the factors that informed these choices.
Interviews with criminal lawyers and staff in other local authorities
In addition to the lawyers for the case study authorities, the Project team interviewed four criminal lawyers involved in prosecuting cases in other local authorities (Criminal lawyers 1 -4). The interviewees were purposefully identified either from contacts at Safer Renting or from newspaper reports of illegal eviction prosecutions. One of the interviews included not only the lawyer at the local authority but also two PSH officers involved in the prosecutions undertaken by that authority. The interviews explored the progress for illegal eviction and harassment cases, any obstacles to justice and reform of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977.
Interviews civil lawyers and staff at advice organisations
Eleven interviews were undertaken with civil lawyers (Civil Lawyers 1 - 11). Again, the interviewees were purposefully identified from: knowledge of the research team; contacts made through a presentation made a research team member for the Doughty Street Chambers’ All Day Housing Conference 2025: ‘Rogue Landlords’; and contacting solicitors with legal aid housing contracts in the Y&H region. Three were barristers (one employed in a tenant organisation), all in London. Three were solicitors in private practice firms that have legal aid contracts for housing cases; two were in London and one in Birmingham. The remaining worked in Law Centres or NGOs with legal aid contracts for housing cases either as solicitors or as housing advisors. One was out of London. None of the interviewees worked north of Birmingham. No responses were received from the solicitors in the Y&H region. The interviews asked about the interviews experience of clients who had been illegally evicted and/or harassed, and taking cases to the county court of the tribunal for rent repayment orders. In addition, three interviews were undertaken with advice organisations (Advice 1-3). A focus group also took place with four Safer Renting staff. These interviews were focused on the advice and support given to clients and working with other organisations.
Observation of three cases at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court
One the research team observed a hearing day for local authority cases at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court in June 2025. Three illegal eviction cases were heard. All were adjourned for trial or sentencing at a later date.
Focus groups with judges
The research team sought to interview both magistrates and judges of the First Tier Tribunal (Residential Property) (the FTT). In order to interview judges, it is necessary to seek permission from the Judicial Office. An application was made in November 2024. Permission to interview judges from the FTT was given in June 2025. Two focus groups and an individual interview with judges from the London and Northern region of the FTT took place in August 2025. The interviews explored the judges’ experience of civil penalty appeals, rent repayment and banning orders and what factors informed their decision-making. Permission to interview magistrates was given on 13 August 2025, but it was not possible, within the timeframe of the project, to recruit any magistrates who had experience of housing offences.
Quantitative data
Data from FOI request to London boroughs
The research team were sent the responses to an FOI request to all London Boroughs for information on illegal eviction and harassment made by Gus Silverman, solicitor at Deighton Pierce Glynn in August 2024. The responses to the requests had limited quantitative data, but the qualitative data has been included in the analysis.
Banning Order decisions
Decisions on Banning Orders are published on the FTT website. All the decisions published up to March 2024 (n=40) were analysed to explore what contributed to a successful banning order application. Note that this figure includes two appeal cases seen by the Upper Tribunal and one variation of a decision.
Ministry of Justice prosecution data
An application for data on housing offences (Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and Housing Act 2004) prosecuted between 2011-2023, was made to the MoJ. The data was released 21 May 2024. Analysis was conducted using the data flat files for each year, which capture defendant cases at principal offence level. Where cases involve more than one offence, this dataset records information for the offence with the most serious disposal. As such, the data may underestimate the overall number of offences and less serious disposals (e.g. disposal orders and victim surcharges). However, as housing offence cases are prosecuted by the local authority, a significant discrepancy between actual and reported case figures is unlikely.
Data analysis involved identification of housing offence types using Home Office (HO) and Criminal Justice System (CJS) offence codes, associated outcomes including findings and disposal, and geographical and longitudinal trends.
Disclaimer: This work was produced using administrative data accessed through the ONS Secure Research Service. The use of the data in this work does not imply the endorsement of the ONS data owners (e.g., HM Courts and Tribunals Service and the MoJ) in relation to the interpretation or analysis. This work uses research datasets which may not exactly reproduce Accredited Official Statistics aggregates. Accredited Official Statistics follow consistent statistical conventions over time and cannot be compared to Data First linked datasets.
Local authority civil penalty notice data
All local authorities in Y&H were asked for civil penalty notice (CPN) data: Data on offence, frequency and size of CPNs, and recovery rates. Data was collected from eight local authorities from the fifteen authorities in the region.
Data from RRO applications and CPN appeals in the FTT
Toward the end of the project, data created by Marks out of Tenancy (MOOT) using text-mining to scrape all the published decisions on the category ‘Housing Act 2004 and Housing and Planning Act 2016’ was sent to the Research team. A very small part of the data, concerning CPN cases and Rent Repayment Orders, was analysed.
Data from legal aid
Quarterly statistics for legal aid are published publicly. Using that data, the number of legal aid applications for harassment and wrongful eviction over time were identified.
WP4: Tenant experience
(Lead: Lisa O’Malley, University of York)
Developmental work
This work package aimed to explore tenant experience of landlord-perpetrated crime. In part, ESRC funding was used to employ a support worker at the Bradford housing charity Hope Housing, which works with tenants excluded from the mainstream housing market. Early development was conducted with tenants and support workers. This work indicated that tenants did not always recognise that they had lived in the ‘private rented sector’: their experience included often extremely precarious living arrangements where there was still an expectation that they should pay rent. This research collaboration ended as a consequence of internal management change at the charity.
Qualitative interviews and case studies
The WP then began work with Safer Renting, to pursue joint objectives for this WP and WP5. Safer Renting offers tenants relations expertise to London boroughs and works to secure beneficial outcomes for tenants who have been victimised by criminal landlords. Many tenants in their caseload will have experienced actual or attempted illegal eviction. Formal interviews with Safer Renting clients were conducted by Safer Renting caseworkers, using a topic guide agreed by the team and which focused on the tenants’ rental experience. In total, fourteen depth interviews were completed and transcribed. These interviews were analysed using a thematic grid. Case workers were themselves interviewed to secure a further 33 case summaries. This method ensured that these clients remained anonymous. All these clients had agreed that their cases could be used for further research.
Attempts were made to contact other charities and agencies who support tenants who are likely to be marginalised in the private rented sector, with very limited success.
WP5: Illegal eviction
(Lead: Julie Rugg, University of York)
This WP, which was not anticipated in the initial objectives for the project, was completed in collaboration with Safer Renting and staff working across the other WPs. This element of the project aimed to assess the degree to which the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 could be regarded as fit for purpose. This WP included multiple elements.
Qualitative data
Safer Renting interviews
Interviews were conducted with fourteen Safer Renting clients who had been subjected to illegal eviction or attempted illegal eviction. The interviews were completed by Safer Renting staff. The interviews focused on the rental experience of the tenant from the start of the tenancy, including reasons why the tenant moved into the property, experiences through the course of the tenancy and events leading up to the attempted or actual illegal eviction.
Safer Renting cases
Safer Renting casework staff were asked to select four or five cases to discuss. All had been referred to Safer Renting between December 2023 and April 2025. The case workers were asked for basic demographic information about the client, the circumstances in which the case came to the attention of Safer Renting, and a summary of the problems with the landlord as reported by tenant including a narrative of the attempted or actual illegal eviction.
WP2 interviews
All the respondents who were interviewed in WP2 were asked about the incidence of illegal eviction and about the local authority responses in tackling this problem. Interviews with housing options staff were strongly focused on procedures in response to illegal eviction.
WP3 qualitative data
A number of the elements from WP3 qualitative data was used for this WP. This included:
The case study of local authority MNM;
Interviews with criminal lawyers and staff in other local authorities;
Interviews civil lawyers and staff at advice organisations;
Observation of three cases at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court.
Quantitative data
WP3 quantitative data
This WP also drew on the following quantitative data from WP3:
MoJ data, reporting on the incidence of illegal eviction, sentencing and outcomes;
Data from FOI request to London boroughs;
Data from RRO applications and CPN appeals in the FTT;
Data from legal aid.