header-logo header-logo

10 December 2025
Issue: 8143 / Categories: Legal News , Housing , Consumer , Landlord&tenant , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Housing disrepair claims could learn lesson from whiplash reforms

All housing disrepair claims could be transferred from the county court to the small claims court, and referral fees banned, under reforms being considered by ministers

A government call for evidence, ‘Housing disrepair claims’, issued last week, asks whether ‘lessons from the approach taken to personal injury claims’ could be applied to housing disrepair. Banning referral fees, for example, would enable claimants to choose the most appropriate solicitor rather than the ‘highest bidder’.

Reforming ‘no win no fee’ arrangements, introducing rules to deter exaggerated or fraudulent claims, and raising the threshold for the small claims track (where both sides pay their own costs) could also be borrowed from the personal injury reforms. Currently, the small claims threshold is £1,000 for housing disrepair. It was raised to £5,000 for whiplash claims in 2018.

The joint Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government paper notes the low threshold can ‘encourage unmeritorious claims’ as the defendant will often settle rather than risk having to pay the other side’s costs as well as the repair if they lose.

It also warns of bad practice in law firms, stating: ‘We have heard reports of [claims management companies] and solicitors targeting tenants... encouraging claims when it may not be in the tenant’s best interest, failing to warn tenants of risks involved, and offering counterproductive advice—for example encouraging a tenant not to let landlords in to carry out inspections or fix issues.

‘This can result in tenants having to live with disrepair for longer and discourage them from accessing more effective redress routes.’

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has previously raised concerns about some solicitors operating in the housing disrepair sector, in its August paper, ‘High-volume consumer claims thematic review’. It found evidence some firms were not adequately informing clients about potential costs, risks and alternative options.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll