STAIRS Update: Consultation outcome now published

The Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities (DLUHC) has today published: 

• The outcome of its consultation on: (1) the proposed Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) and (2) the accompanying draft direction to the Regulator of Social Housing (the Regulator), which ran from 20 May 2024 to 22 July 2024; and 
• An updated policy statement on STAIRs, based on the consultation responses. 

We strongly advise our clients to review both the full consultation outcome and the revised policy statement. Below is a summary of some of the key points from the consultation.  

The outcome of the consultation 

Publication schemes 

Most respondents (69%) supported the publication scheme requirements, recognising their potential to enhance transparency between private registered providers of social housing (PRPs) and tenants.

However, 35% of respondents felt that the policy statement lacked clarity with respect to the following: 

• What information should be published; 
• How it should be shared with tenants; 
• How frequently it should be updated. 

Concerns were also raised about vague information categories and the handling of sensitive and personal data. 

The Government response confirmed the following: 

• Although PRPs are not required to implement publication schemes until October 2026, they are expected to begin preparations now ahead of the implementation of STAIRs. 
• PRPs should tailor their approach to reflect their specific circumstances and tenant needs, whilst adhering to the STAIRs transparency principles. 
• The policy statement now clarifies: 
  • PRPs are not required to create new records to comply; 
  • Reasonable redactions are permitted; 
  • Information should be published in a format that supports tenant understanding; 
  • Schemes must be updated regularly - fixed review intervals will not be provided. This is to ensure that schemes remain current while allowing flexibility to accommodate the specific circumstances of each PRP; 
  • Broad information categories will remain to avoid PRPs taking a tick-box approach to disclosure; 
  • PRPs must take a reasonable approach to excluding commercially sensitive or personal information, ensuring compliance with data protection laws; and 
  • PRPs are no longer required to publish responses to previous information requests. 

Scope of information covered by STAIRs 

Just over the majority (59%) of respondents agreed with the scope of information covered by STAIRs. 

However, 37% said that more guidance on what constitutes relevant information and how much detail should be required. 

A number of respondents noted potential overlaps with existing information requirements under data protection law. 

Some respondents also considered that the policy statement missed key aspects of information, such as information related to the safety and quality of homes, including fire safety and modernisation.

The Government response confirmed that the information categories were intentionally broad to cover most likely subjects of interest for tenants, and made clear that issues relating to building and fire safety would be covered by the policy. The response also stated that STAIRs is not intended to overlap with other legislation relating to the sharing of tenant information, as made clear in the policy statement which states that information is not ‘relevant information’ if there is a right of access to that information by or under any statutory provision. 

Processing requests 

A majority (80%) of respondents agreed that PRPs should be required to use all reasonable endeavours to obtain information held by another body or person responsible for the landlord's social housing on their behalf. 

However, the following concerns were raised: 

• Clarity is needed on what constitutes ‘reasonable endeavours’; 
• The potential impact on the 30-calendar day response time limit; and 
• The requirement to fulfil requests unless it is unreasonable to withhold information should be expanded to include other grounds of refusal set out elsewhere in the consultation (such as where responding would exceed 18 hours of staff time). 

In response, the policy statement has been amended to provide clarity that PRPs must fulfil requests for relevant information unless it is reasonable to withhold the information from disclosure or other grounds for refusal are met. 

The response also confirmed the following: 

• STAIRs will not require PRPs to re-negotiate existing contracts with third parties to include data sharing agreements, however PRPs should consider what steps they need to take to ensure they can meet the requirements in a proportionate way and ensure they can provide evidence of the endeavours taken to obtain information. 
• PRPs are permitted to exceed the 30-calendar day response time limit in exceptional circumstances, such as where additional time is needed to arrange access to relevant information held by third parties responsible for the management of the PRP's social housing on the PRP's behalf. 

Refusing information requests 

A majority (70%) of respondents agreed with the requirements relating to circumstances where PRPs can refuse to provide information. However, there were concerns raised regarding: 

• Whether there is sufficient detail on where PRPs can refuse to disclose information; 
• Potential conflict between these requirements and other provisions, such as the FOI Act; and 
• What is reasonable in making decisions not to disclose. 
• Whether the 18-hour staff time limit for responding to requests was too long or too short. 

The Government response assured that the policy statement sets out circumstances where a PRP may withhold information, including where it is considered reasonable to do so. 

The Government response also confirmed that the policy statement has been amended to introduce a requirement for PRPs to have a policy setting out their approach to decisions on withholding information. This is intended to ensure that PRPs develop an appropriate approach to withholding information and enable the Ombudsman to consider whether a suitable policy is in place. 

With respect to the 18-hour staff time limit, the DLUHC has clarified its expectation is that most requests will take significantly less time than 18 hours to respond to, including those relating to safety. Where tenants have significant, urgent concerns regarding the safety of their homes, these should be raised separately with the PRP and through other channels as appropriate. 

Responding to requests 

Despite a majority (76%) of respondents agreeing with the requirements relating to information requests, a number sought clarity with respect to the interpretation of timescales and what would constitute an ‘exceptional circumstance’. 

The Government response assured that the requirements for responding to information requests gives providers some flexibility to consider what is appropriate in specific circumstances, and that the Ombudsman will determine each case on its own merits. 

The response also confirmed that exceptional circumstances can include where additional time is needed to arrange access to relevant information held by another body responsible for the management of the PRP's social housing on their behalf. 

The policy statement has been amended to include a requirement for PRPs to acknowledge receipt of all information requests they receive from tenants. PRPs should note however that the 30-calendar day time limit for responding to requests begins from receipt of the request, not said acknowledgement. 

What happens next? 

The DLUHC is now directing the Regulator to introduce a new standard requiring all PRPs of social housing to meet the requirements set out in the STAIRs policy statement. 

As the Regulator has a duty to consult on additions to the consumer standards, the DLUHC expects the Regulator to consult on any new standard reflecting the STAIRs direction. 

The DLUHC also expects the Housing Ombudsman to consult on necessary changes to their Housing Ombudsman Scheme. This will include asking for views on how it should handle complaints about the outcomes of STAIRs reviews and how those reviews are carried out. 

With respect to the actual implementation of STAIRs following these expected consultations: 

• From 1 October 2026, PRPs will need to meet the requirements set out in Chapter 1 of the policy statement. These requirements focus on proactively publishing information. 
• From 1 April 2027, PRPs will need to meet the requirements in Chapter 2 of the policy statement. These requirements focus on responding to information requests. 

If you have any questions about STAIRs, please contact Hetal Ruparelia or Georgia Maskell.