A Fairer Rental Market: Life in Scotland’s social rented sector

The Scottish Social Housing Charter, monitoring, and regulation

In addition to the above standards, since 2012 social landlords must comply with the Scottish Social Housing Charter. This sets standards in the form of Charter Outcomes that all social landlords should aim to achieve when delivering services. Landlords are responsible for understanding the rights and needs of different customers, and delivering services that recognise and meet these, which may include making reasonable adjustments.[20] The Scottish Housing Regulator monitors landlord progress through the Annual Return of the Charter. Social landlords must also submit Annual Assurance Statements, to confirm compliance with Charter Outcomes and legislative duties, and in case of Registered Social Landlords, governance standards. As the regulator only has a role in the governance and financial management of RSLs, local authorities are not required to confirm in their Annual Assurance Statement that they comply with the Standards of Governance and Financial Management.

The regulator can take action to protect the interests of social renters when it becomes aware of issues, i.e. through an Annual Assurance Statement, or if a concern is raised by renters, the landlord, third parties, or auditors.[21] If a social landlord regularly and repeatedly fails to achieve the regulatory requirements for social housing or does something else that negatively affects a group of social renters, this can also be reported to the regulator as a Serious Concern.[22]

The Charter is published by the Scottish Ministers and is due to be reviewed during 2026, providing the opportunity to improve standards across the social rented sector.

An additional duty applies to councils. The Consumer Duty, introduced through the Consumer Scotland Act 2020, obliges designated public authorities to have regard to a) the impact of those decisions on consumers in Scotland; and b) the desirability of reducing harm to consumers in Scotland when making strategic decisions.[23] Consumer Scotland published guidance and an impact assessment, to help relevant public authorities meet the Consumer Duty. Councils are subject to the duty and as such, must consider the impact on different groups of social renters. While the Consumer Duty does not apply to housing associations, they must ensure they understand and cater to the needs of different groups under the Scottish Social Housing Charter’s Equalities Outcome.

Energy efficiency measures

The Social Housing Charter also requires all social landlords to meet relevant Energy Efficiency and Zero Emission Heat Standards, and the regulator normally monitors performance through specific indicators. Existing evidence clearly shows that homes in the social rented sector are generally more energy efficient and better insulated than those in the private rented and owner-occupied sectors.[24]

However, social renters are also more than twice as likely to be in fuel poverty (49% vs 22%) and extreme fuel poverty (22% vs 11%) than those renting privately. This will have been exacerbated by the rise in energy price rises since 2022 and the significantly lower incomes of households in the social rented sector compared to other tenures. In our findings we discuss that energy efficiency / heating costs are rated as good by only 62% of participants, which may be related to the likelihood of fuel poverty. Given these demographic factors, it is important that homes in the social sector can be heated as efficiently as possible.

The Scottish Government has also committed to introducing a Buildings (Heating and Energy Performance) and Heat Networks (Scotland) Bill early in the 2026-31 parliamentary session, enabling the introduction of new minimum energy performance standards.[25] The installation of energy efficiency measures should lead to reduced energy consumption and lower bills.

More widely, however, it is clear that there are a range of financial and practical challenges to the delivery of insulation and heating system upgrades, while simpler, less expensive improvements have very largely been completed. While it is critical that physical improvement works continue, it is also important that the UK and Scottish Governments consider what more can be done to improve household incomes and improve access to lower energy prices in the social rented sector.

The review of Scotland’s Fuel Poverty Strategy, due to take place in 2026, provides an opportunity to consider the support needed in an integrated way, building on good practice examples already in place across the sector.

Our Fairer Rental Market work

We commissioned this research as part of Consumer Scotland’s programme of work called A Fairer Rental Market. We aim to gather evidence and identify policy solutions aimed at reducing harm to consumers who rent, increasing consumer confidence, and advancing fairness across the social and private rented sectors. Our first A Fairer Rented Market publication was our scoping study Consumer challenges in the private and social rented sectors, in November 2024.[26] In October 2025 we published our qualitative research study A Fairer Rental Market: Exercising tenancy rights in Scotland’s private rented sector.[27]

Our review of existing research identified a need for more evidence on the experiences of social renters, how those vary across characteristics of social renters, and how those compare with renters in the private rented sector.[28] To better understand the experiences of social renters in Scotland and to identify where policy and practice could improve to benefit those across both sectors, we identified the need to:

• Gather quantitative evidence on the renting experience of social renters, to identify what affects satisfaction levels and where improvement may be needed
• Compare our evidence with similar recent surveys of private tenants, to identify disparities in outcomes across tenure types in order to support targeted advocacy to improve outcomes in each sector

Following a pilot, the survey was conducted online and by telephone amongst 1,402 social renters between July and September 2025. Participants were asked about their experiences and satisfaction with the following topics:

• General satisfaction with the social housing landlord;
• Communication with the social housing landlord;
• Property conditions and standards;
• Issues, complaints and rights;
• Accessibility and security of tenure;
• Thoughts for improvement;
• Property and tenancy details.

About Consumer Scotland

Our purpose is to improve outcomes for current and future consumers, and our strategic objectives are:

• To enhance understanding and awareness of consumer issues by strengthening the evidence base;
• To serve the needs and aspirations of current and future consumers by inspiring and influencing the public, private and third sectors;
• To enable the active participation of consumers in a fairer economy by improving access to information and support.

Consumer Scotland uses data, research and analysis to inform our work on the key issues facing consumers in Scotland. In conjunction with that evidence base we seek a consumer perspective through the application of the consumer principles of access, choice, safety, information, fairness, representation and redress.

We have a particular focus on three consumer challenges: affordability, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and consumers in vulnerable circumstances.

Consumer principles

The Consumer Principles are a set of principles developed by consumer organisations in the UK and overseas.

Consumer Scotland uses the Consumer Principles as a framework through which to analyse the evidence on markets and related issues from a consumer perspective.

In the context of consumers as social renters, the principles can be applied as follows:

• Access: Do consumers have the opportunity to access affordable tenancies that meet their needs?
• Choice: Do consumers have enough choice about what market to enter and what property they rent?
• Safety: Do social renters receive the support they need to help ensure their homes are well-maintained and free of damp, mould, and other hazards?
• Information: Are consumers made aware of key characteristics and their rights before they sign a tenancy or when they suffer detriment?
• Fairness: Are any groups of social renters experiencing poorer outcomes?
• Representation: Do consumers have a voice when it comes to shaping their housing conditions or rent levels?
• Redress: Are consumers able to access advice and exercise their rights when the property doesn’t meet their needs, when there is an undue increase in rent or other issue that requires resolution?

With regard to property conditions overall, Consumer Scotland notes the ongoing work across the social housing sector to determine and implement agreed net zero and energy efficiency standards, as well as a set of practical requirements on social landlords to implement the Investigation and Commencement of Repair (Scotland) Regulations 2026 (Scotland’s version of Awaab’s Law) in October 2026.[31] These measures are under development at the time of publication of this report. They have the potential to improve satisfaction levels with the condition of social housing over time, but it is important that they are reflected in future Scottish Government policy, priorities, and standard setting in relation to accessibility, repairs and maintenance and energy efficiency. In this regard we note that the regulator recently implemented revised damp and mould indicators under the Charter, to be reviewed after May 2026. This review too will need to consider the duties placed upon social landlords from October 2026 onwards.

Repairs and maintenance issues

Participants were generally slightly happier with the overall repairs service (79%) than with aspects of repair responsiveness, such as timeliness (76%) and communication (73%).

Disabled renters who have disabilities or health conditions that limit them ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ were less likely to be satisfied with repairs; only 73% and 71% (respectively) were satisfied with the overall repairs service compared with those without (86%).

It may be that that disabled social renters have a greater need for these services, that their repairs and adaptations are less straightforward, or that they feel the impact more keenly given existing vulnerabilities. In any case, this group of social renters clearly reported having a less satisfactory experience.

Those in homes over 10 years old which have not been recently renovated also reported lower satisfaction levels with repairs, with our research finding that 66% of these renters were satisfied with the overall repairs service from the landlord, compared with 84% of those in newer properties.

Energy efficiency and heating costs

The majority of social renters are happy with their home, with 77% rating the overall condition as good.

While a majority of participants (62%) also rated the energy efficiency / cost to heat the property as good, this was the weakest aspect of home conditions. Again, the proportion of renters rating this as good was markedly lower amongst disabled renters or those in older, unrenovated properties.

In 2024 Consumer Scotland research found that many disabled consumers have increased energy needs – for example, requiring a warmer home to manage pain or mitigate damp, or needing to run electrical medical, mobility, or assistive technology equipment.[32] Our 2025 Energy Affordability Tracker found that households where a member has a disability or health condition are more likely to find it difficult to afford their energy bills.[33]

Some older homes are likely to be less well insulated and reliant on inefficient heating systems. Energy efficiency and heating costs have been an area of concern across the sector. The lower levels of satisfaction with this aspect may be associated with higher than average levels of fuel poverty amongst social renters.

It is important to understand changes in the drivers of fuel poverty among tenants. Scottish House Condition Survey data show that the social housing sector has significantly higher standards of energy‑efficiency, when compared to other tenures, but at the same time, significantly higher levels of fuel poverty. [34] Analysis in the Survey highlights that experience of fuel poverty in the sector is closely linked to a combination of rising prices and lower household incomes.

Some groups are less satisfied across a range of different measures     

In line with the consumer principle of fairness, groups of renters should not be experiencing poorer outcomes based on their own status or that of their home. However, we found differences in satisfaction levels overall and with the condition of homes specifically, related to participants’ age, house type, and disability or health status.

While most participants held positive views, certain groups of social renters were less likely to be satisfied :

• Disabled renters
• Those who do not (know if they) have a housing officer or do not know how to contact them
• Those whose homes were built over 10 years ago and have not been recently renovated
• Those aged 35-44

Further research would be needed to ascertain the full extent of drivers relating to the latter two groups, and we encourage those working in the sector to monitor and take into consideration how outcomes for these renters might be improved.

Disabled social renters are less happy with their home

Nearly 1 in 5 social renters whose lives are limited “a lot” by a disability or health condition said that their home does not meet their needs well (19%), twice as likely as those without such a disability or health condition(9%). Disabled renters also experienced lower satisfaction across a range of other key renting experiences including:

• Home condition
• Landlord responsiveness to repairs and maintenance
• Likelihood of experiencing an issue and
• Landlord relationship

This suggests that they are at risk of experiencing poorer outcomes in general.

Our findings suggest that homes may not always be fully meeting the needs of those with greater mobility, accessibility, or health-related requirements. In addition, aspects of the fabric of older unrenovated homes may contribute to poorer energy efficiency, higher heating costs, and lower satisfaction, although further research would be needed to establish to what extent this is the case.

Our research suggests that further measures are needed to ensure landlords understand the experiences of different groups and put in place policies and practices to respond to these needs.

Housing officers and named contacts could play a bigger role

Those participants who knew they had a housing officer and how to contact them reported consistently higher outcomes or satisfaction levels, than those who did not suggesting that tenants find having a housing officer helpful and feel positive about it. Across our research, having such a contact was associated with higher satisfaction and better outcomes. While not all named contacts may be have the title “housing officer” we refer to all such named contacts under this term.

Overall, 71% of participants knew who their housing officer was and how to contact them, 9% did not know how to contact them, 11% did not know if they had one, and 9% did not think they had one. As such, 3 out of 10 appear not to be receiving the full benefits that they might do from having a Housing Officer, either due to this arrangement not being in place or tenants lacking sufficient awareness or understanding of it.

We found that 77% of those who know they have a housing officer and how to contact them rate their landlord’s responsiveness to general contact positively, compared with 57% who do not. We also found that the former were twice as likely to know where to go if their landlord did not fully address an issue or complaint as those who did not (56% vs 29%), which suggests the important role of housing officers in this process.

During our pilot survey, some focus group participants told us that they associated having a housing officer or named contact with a more personal and accountable service, which they preferred to leaving a voicemail or having to tell their story multiple times when enquiring about progress.

Social landlords are not obliged to ensure that every renter has a housing officer.

Other factors associated with lower satisfaction levels

While 86% of all participants felt that their home was meeting their needs, this is lower amongst those living in homes older than 10 years which have not recently been renovated. This pattern is consistent across a range of indicators including the condition of the home, repair and maintenance, and energy efficiency levels. In particular, those in older homes that have not recently undergone any renovations were less likely to rate various aspects of their home’s condition as good, compared to those in homes that have, and particularly more so to those in homes that were built within the last 10 years.

This group was also one of those less likely to know where to go if their landlord does not resolve an issue or complaint. These findings indicate that initial issues around property quality may be compounded by potentially unsatisfactory landlord responses, and by limited awareness of who to contact when the landlord does not (fully) address an issue.

We recognise that living in a home built over 10 years ago that has not been renovated is associated with lower levels of satisfaction and it may be that these are subject to more and/or challenging repair and maintenance issues. Further research would be required to understand what drives these differences and identify policy solutions.

Landlord responsiveness to reported issues and complaints

While three-quarters of all participants were satisfied with their landlord’s general communications, satisfaction is lower in relation to how landlords respond to reports of specific issues.

Landlord responsiveness to specific reported issues

Of the 53% of participants who had experienced an issue in the last six months, the majority (83%) had reported it to their landlord. However, only 30% of them considered it fully resolved. We recognise that renters and landlords may have different definitions of what counts as “resolved”. For example, a sector‑wide review from 2023/2024 shows that 88.4% of repairs were completed “right first time”, yet it also found that overall satisfaction with repairs has been trending downward in recent years.[35]

Only 30% of social renters who had reported a problem with their home in the last six months felt that their landlord had fully resolved it, even fewer than the 40% of private renters across all income bands who felt the same.[36]

Only 4 in 10 of all participants considered that their landlord responds well to or helps with difficulties around paying their rent or to requests for advice about social issues, i.e. neighbours and community problems. Similarly, 44% found that their landlord deals well with complaints and disputes. As these are issues many renters do not experience, there were relatively many who answered “don’t know/not applicable”. However, even excluding these, the proportion of participants who rated their landlord’s response to issues of this nature remained low.

Over 1 in 4 have self-managed and funded repairs

While over half (59%) of social renters said they always report issues to their landlord, a substantial minority do not. When we asked why, around one in five (19%) would decide to fix the problem themselves, while 15% would feel the issue was not serious or urgent enough to report. A further 12% doubt that reporting would lead to any action.

Over a quarter of participants (28%) had paid for or repaired something themselves that they believed should have been covered by their landlord. This is particularly common amongst higher-income households, those living in older unrenovated properties, those aged 18-54 and those from a non-White British background.

Existing evidence shows that private renters often have concerns about the impact of reporting issues on landlord relationships, being a ‘good tenant’, and fear of eviction.[37] We found that such fears were much less common amongst social renters, indicating a significantly higher sense of security of tenancy. This may be influenced by a more robust regulatory framework and protections. Consumer Scotland research into the private rented sector has found that while individual journeys vary, private renters are generally likely to manage repair and maintenance issues themselves and only take action when issues are exacerbated - for example, where they experience health impacts.[38] Further research might establish what drives social renters to move from self-managing to reporting their issues. An increased understanding of these trigger points may help to understand how renters across both sectors might be motivated to report issues as soon as they occur.

The Scottish Social Housing Charter includes a specific Communications Outcome, obliging landlords to put in place measures ensuring renters can easily communicate with them and understand how and why it makes decisions and the services it provides. This includes making it easy for social renters to make complaints and provide feedback, and clarifying how it has acted in response to this. Our findings suggest that while the Charter may be effective in encouraging good standards around general communication, there is more to be done to improve landlord communication around issues and complaints.

Landlords could improve their handling of complaints

Nearly 1 in 5 (18%) participants had made a complaint to their landlord in the preceding 12 months and fewer than half of them were satisfied with any aspect of how this was handled. Key drivers of dissatisfaction were the speed of resolution, a lack of updates, a sense that the landlord did not take their complaint seriously, and the landlord’s approach to handling the complaint.

Participants who had made a complaint to their landlord in the preceding 12 months were overwhelmingly dissatisfied with all aspects of complaints handling and satisfaction rates were low across the board. Across all categories, between 34% and 47% were dissatisfied and satisfaction levels were between 30% and 45%.Of the 18% who had raised a complaint with their landlord in the preceding 12 months, only 33% were satisfied with their landlord keeping them up to date on these and 44% were dissatisfied. Such experiences may colour the perception of the eventual outcome.

As satisfaction with complaint handling was one of the lowest rated areas, we also considered whether other data sources indicated potential issues in this area. The timeliness of complaint handling is one area in which landlords are obliged to report in their Annual Return of the Charter, which the Scottish Housing Regulator then analyses.

We note that the Scottish Housing Regulator’s analysis of the 2024/25 Charter Returns found that, on average, 97% of all Stage 1 complaints and 91% of Stage 2 complaints had been responded to in full.[39] While we note that this does not necessarily equate to resolution of the reported issue or a satisfactory outcome for the complainant, these reported percentages suggest that social landlords rarely fail to respond to complaints altogether.

As previously set out, the deadline for landlords to respond to Stage 1 complaints is five working days, and the average response time of housing associations in 2024/25 stayed within this timeframe at four working days. However, councils took eight days on average to respond. While the deadline for Stage 2 response is normally 20 working days, councils took an average of 27 working days, whereas housing associations again stayed within the deadline with an average of 18 working days. The report also found that housing associations are more likely to provide a full response to Stage 2 complaints (94%) than councils (87%).[40]

Outlier figures from the same report show that the maximum time for responding to a Stage 1 complaint in the social rented sector was 55 working days and for Stage 2 this extended to 382 working days.

While generally we found no significant differences between the experiences of those renting from councils and housing associations, we did find that the latter were significantly more likely to be satisfied with how their landlord handled complaints. For example, 55% of housing association renters were satisfied with how they were treated by landlord staff, compared to 35% of council renters. A similar pattern appears across all measures, including ease of dealing with the landlord (53% vs 31%) and the speed of complaint resolution (39% vs 20%).

Overall, the reported performance indicators in this area show that the length of time taken by social landlords to respond to complaints has gradually increased over the past few years, but is generally still compliant.[41] This may suggest a disconnect between complainants’ expectations and formal requirements on social landlords, in line with observations by the ombudsman around timeliness of complaints responses. We therefore note that renters’ awareness of the timeframes for response may be low, which would impact upon expectations and what might be considered an acceptable speed of complaint handling.

Taken together, performance data and the results of our research suggest widespread dissatisfaction with key elements of the complaints process and some variance from the agreed standards. Complaints are taking too long to resolve, renters are unhappy with the way in which they are kept updated, and there is a perception that landlords are not taking their complaints seriously. Too few complaints are resolved to tenants’ satisfaction and they may not be fully resolved at all.

Awareness of advice and redress options for unresolved complaints

Issues around poor complaints handling can be exacerbated by low levels of awareness amongst renters about how they can seek help or escalate their complaints. Fewer than half of participants with unresolved issues sought further help or advice and similar numbers did not know how to seek this, contributing to low resolution levels. Only 48% of participants reported knowing what to do if their landlord fails to address their issue, indicating a significant lack of awareness around how they can seek support to move issues forward. This suggests that awareness is lower amongst social renters than private renters (63%).[42]

Under half (43%) of those social renters who had reported a property condition issue that they considered to be unresolved had sought help or advice, after which 18% considered it fully resolved. Among those who sought advice, most had approached friends or family or elected representatives. Other sources of advice included national advice bodies, tenant representatives or advocacy groups, solicitors or law centres, and the ombudsman. Excluding those who only sought advice from informal channels (friends or family), the percentage of those seeking advice was only 33%.

When we asked participants about their awareness of specific regulatory bodies, rights and standards, 69% said they were aware of at least one of these. Awareness is highest for the Right to Repair Scheme (49%), followed by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (44%). Around 4 in 10 know about the Scottish Housing Quality Standard (41%), the Scottish Social Housing Charter (38%), and the Scottish Housing Regulator (37%). Awareness is lowest for the Tolerable Standard (32%). Overall, our findings indicate a substantial lack of awareness of tenancy rights and how to exercise them. The different sets of standards and rights may contribute to difficulty in understanding the full extent of renters’ rights and landlords’ responsibilities. We covered the content and relationship between different sets of regulations in Chapter 1.

In this context we note that awareness of bodies and rights does not necessarily equate to knowing how and when to use them. For example, the ombudsman identified that 139 out of the 971 housing cases it determined in 2024/25 were premature (14%), meaning they had been made before the complainant had exhausted their landlord’s internal complaints handling process. [43]

This suggests a need for some landlords to provide more clarity on all different stages of the internal complaints process and when complainants can escalate to the ombudsman. Other reasons for premature complaints may be frustration with unresolved issues, or a need for improved signposting to the ombudsman, with more information on the process. We are aware that the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is currently considering wider engagement work to understand how and where awareness might be increased.

What renters do when their issue remains unresolved

While slightly more private renters had experienced a recent problem with their home (58% vs 53%), slightly higher proportions had reported issues to their landlords (90% vs 83%). However, private renters were also more likely to have had their issues resolved fully or partially by their landlord following reporting (91% vs 59%). This finding further suggests a need to improve how social landlords address issues when reported, and how they handle complaints.

While private landlords can be individuals or businesses, a recent survey of over a thousand Scottish landlords suggests that the vast majority (92%) are either private individuals or a couple/family.[44] This may lead to varying levels of knowledge and information provision to private renters, and low awareness of advice and redress options. The lower number of social landlords and their relatively larger size, together with the greater formalisation of complaint processes and the presence of both ombudsman and regulator should, in theory, make it easier to provide consistent information to tenants in the social sector. However, this does not appear to have resulted in better outcomes for social renters in terms of the redress process, with comparably low levels of awareness.

Overall, our findings suggest that a significant proportion of renters across both sectors self-manage and/or fund issues, and rely on informal networks rather than formal support channels. This may be due to the relatively low sense of awareness of how to escalate an issue, and may be compounded by the high levels of dissatisfaction with complaint handling.

In our report on the experience of private renters, we recommended that the Scottish Government improves clarity on existing and new rights and obligations following passage of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2025.[45] Our findings around limited awareness of rights and redress options amongst social renters have reinforced the need for this work across both sectors.