The Concrete Floor Problem in Social Housing

The practice of removal at void 

A central finding from the research and from wider sector engagement is that flooring is frequently removed during the void process even when it is in usable condition. The reasons given include pressure to turn voids around quickly, concerns about quality, and an assumption that incoming residents will prefer a blank starting point. 

In practice, this assumption is rarely tested. Where landlords have audited what their contractors are doing on the ground, they have found that flooring is being removed as standard, regardless of internal policy. The cost of replacement then falls to the resident at the point of move-in. 

For housing providers, this represents a substantial transfer of cost and risk to households that are often least equipped to absorb it. Residents moving from temporary accommodation, leaving domestic abuse, or coming from homelessness frequently have no furnishings and no available capital. Floor covering is one expense among many, and it is rarely the first that can be addressed. 

Health, safety and the home environment 

The implications extend beyond financial hardship. Bare floors create direct safety concerns, particularly where children are present. Cardboard is sometimes used as a temporary surface for children to play on. Hard, uncovered surfaces increase the transmission of impact noise between flats, which is associated with elevated stress and complaint volumes in adjoining tenancies. 

Floor covering also affects thermal comfort. Uncovered floors increase heat loss at low level and contribute to perceptions of cold within the home, which interact with heating behaviour and indoor environmental conditions. Where residents adjust by raising temperatures intermittently, the result can be increased moisture cycling and a less stable indoor environment. 

The research also identified a strong association between absence of flooring and reduced social engagement. Residents reported being unwilling to invite others into their homes. For children, this can translate into more time spent unsupervised outside, with knock-on effects for community cohesion and safeguarding. 

The funding and policy gap 

The estimated cost of bringing all social housing in England, Scotland and Wales up to a standard that includes floor coverings at let is approximately £495 million. The number is significant, but it sits against an existing cost that is currently borne by residents, often funded through hardship grants, debt or going without other essentials. 

The funding landscape for residents seeking support is fragmented. In Scotland, a statutory crisis scheme provides flooring and publishes data on its use. In England, support depends on the local authority. The most recent published data identified that 48 of 153 upper tier local authorities had closed their local welfare scheme. The Household Support Fund directed approximately one per cent of expenditure to furniture and appliances. The Crisis and Resilience Fund permits flooring provision in guidance, but uptake at local level remains uneven. 

Floor covering also cannot be recovered through service charges. The Department for Work and Pensions has confirmed this position. This places flooring in a different category from many other items a landlord might provide, and removes one of the mechanisms typically available to fund recurring costs. 

The decision to exclude flooring from the revised Decent Homes Standard removed a route through which sector practice was beginning to shift. Some providers had started planning to install flooring in anticipation of regulatory change. The risk now is that those preparations are abandoned. 

Where practice is changing 

Some landlords have moved ahead independently. Thirteen Group has reported that the cost of providing flooring is offset by reductions in arrears, void costs and tenancy turnover, with associated improvements in tenancy sustainment. Orbit has begun installing flooring in all relets. These cases provide an evidence base for the operational and financial logic of provision, beyond the social and health arguments. 

The financial position from the landlord side differs from the resident’s. Procurement at scale, framework agreements and social value clauses give landlords purchasing power that an individual cannot access. The unit cost of provision is therefore lower than the cost residents face when funding it themselves. 

For the Healthy Homes Hub, this falls within a coherent picture of how the condition in which homes are let affects long-term resident health, asset performance and tenancy sustainment. Floor covering is not a discretionary finish. It is part of the fabric that determines whether a property functions as a home from day one. 

Practical steps for housing providers 

• Read the Longleigh Foundation and Altair research on floor covering provision in social housing: https://altairltd.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Final-Report-Longleigh-Flooring-final.pdf 

• Stop removing flooring from voids where it remains in usable condition. Inspect, clean and leave in place, with a simple disclaimer process for the incoming resident where required. 

• Audit what is happening on the ground, including the practice of contractors carrying out void works. Written policy and operational practice are not always aligned. 

• Review the void process from the perspective of the incoming resident. Where the property would not be considered a decent home by an objective observer, the standard for letting needs to be reconsidered. 

• Consider needs-based provision where a blanket approach is not affordable, prioritising households moving from temporary accommodation, fleeing domestic abuse or otherwise arriving without furnishings. 

• Track the wider operational impact of providing flooring, including effects on tenancy sustainment, arrears, void turnaround, complaint volumes and customer satisfaction, to build a clearer business case for sustained provision. 

• Share practice openly with peer organisations. The evidence base improves when landlords already providing flooring publish what they have learned, what it cost and what it saved.