National Panel of Tenants and Service Users 2025 to 2026

Introduction

This report sets out findings from the 2025/26 programme of engagement with the National Panel of Tenants and Service Users, commissioned by the Scottish Housing Regulator (SHR).

The Panel was established in 2013 as a way for the Scottish Housing Regulator to engage with tenants and other users of social landlord services. The Panel is used to gauge service user priorities and experiences, and findings help to shape SHR’s focus as regulator of social landlords. Members include social tenants, people who have used homelessness services, residents of Gypsy/Traveller sites provided by social landlords and owners using social landlord factoring services.

Regular refreshment exercises and ongoing promotion seek to maximise the level of engagement with Panel members, and improve representation of specific groups.  Panel membership stood at 404 individuals in March 2026. A profile of the current Panel membership is provided as an Annex to this report.

The 2025/26 programme

The 2025/26 Panel programme sought to support current SHR priorities and track views over time on key issues such as rents and finances. Across the programme we asked Panel members about:

• Reporting repairs and concerns
• Heating your home
• Rents and value
• Money and finances
• Information on landlord performance
• Getting information on SHR and use of the SHR website
• Experience of homelessness services
• Landlord engagement on Gypsy/Traveller sites

A combined quantitative and qualitative research approach comprised a survey issued to all Panel members in December 2025 followed by more targeted qualitative engagement during February and March 2026. This report combines quantitative survey results with qualitative findings, based on responses to the full Panel survey (47% response, 188 respondents) and qualitative feedback. The qualitative engagement strand involved 23 Panel members, 36 users of homelessness services and 17 residents of Gypsy/Traveller sites.

The survey included questions across the first six themes listed above. Qualitative engagement focused on:

1. Gathering more detailed feedback from Panel members on how they prefer to access SHR information, and priorities for landlord performance information – feedback is included at Performance information topics and Getting information about SHR.
2. Qualitive interviews with users of homelessness services – findings are reported at USERS OF HOMELESSNESS SERVICES.
3. Survey interviews with residents of Gypsy/Traveller sites to explore experience of landlord engagement processes – findings are reported at GYPSY/TRAVELLER SITE RESIDENTS.

The 2025/26 programme has further developed the growing National Panel evidence base, and gathered rich feedback from a range of tenants and other service users across the themes noted above. However, findings should not be seen as necessarily representative of the service user population more widely.

The remainder of this report sets out quantitative and qualitative findings. Data visualisations present overall survey results, and any variation across key respondent groups is highlighted in the body of the report. We refer to those taking part as ‘respondents’ where this was via the survey, and ‘participants’ where this was via qualitative methods. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number; for some questions this means that percentages may not sum to 100%. Similarly, aggregate figures cited in the text (e.g. the percentage of respondents answering ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’) may not sum to results presented in figures and tables. Illustrative quotes from qualitative participants may have been lightly edited for brevity.

Reporting repairs and concerns

A large majority of respondents had received information from their landlord about reporting repairs or safety concerns (89%) and would know how to report repairs (94%) and safety concerns (87%).

More than half of respondents (56%) had received information about reporting damp or mould, and 29% had previously reported damp or mould to their landlord.

The majority (79%) felt that they know how to report damp or mould concerns, but views were more mixed on how their landlord would deal with concerns. Around half were confident that their landlord would deal with concerns quickly and effectively, but up to a third were not confident about this.

Most respondents (63%) mentioned factors that might prevent them reporting damp or mould concerns, primarily related to whether the landlord would be able to resolve the issue and knowing who to speak to.

This section summarises views and experiences in relation to reporting repairs and other concerns including damp or mould in their home.

A large majority of respondents had received information from their landlord about reporting repairs or safety concerns; 89% had received one or more of the types of information listed at Figure 1. Respondents were more likely to have received information on how to report repairs in their home (85%) and least likely to have received information on how their landlord will respond to safety concerns (70%).

These findings were broadly consistent across key respondent groups. The only notable variation was Council tenants being less likely to indicate that they have received information on how the landlord will respond to repairs and safety concerns

Figure 1: Whether received information from landlord about reporting repairs or safety concerns

• How to report repairs in your home Yes 85%, No 12%, Unsure 3%
• How your landlord will respond to repairs Yes 79%, No 17%, Unsure 4%
• How to report safety concerns about your home (e.g. gas or electrical safety) Yes 79%, No 17%, Unsure 4%
• How your landlord will respond to safety concerns Yes 70%, No 23%, Unsure 8%

As Figure 2 shows, a large majority of respondents felt that they know how to report repairs and safety concerns to their landlord; 94% know how to report repairs and 87% know how to report safety concerns. These findings were consistent across key respondent groups.

Figure 2: Whether know how to report repairs or safety concerns

• I know how to report repairs to my landlord Strongly agree 72%, Agree 21%, Neither/Nor 2%, Disagree 4%, Strongly disagree 0%
• I know how to report safety concerns to my landlord Strongly agree 64%, Agree 23%, Neither/Nor 6%, Disagree 5%, Strongly disagree 2%

Reporting damp or mould

More than half of respondents (56%) indicated that they had received information about reporting damp or mould (Figure 3). This shows a 7-point increase from the 2025 survey. This finding was broadly consistent across most respondent groups, although Registered Social Landlord (RSL) tenants and Regional Tenant Organisation (RTO[1]) members were somewhat more likely than others to have received information on damp or mould.

Figure 3: Whether received information from landlord about reporting damp or mould

2026

Yes in the last 12 months 40%, Yes, previously 16%, No 36%, Unsure 9%

2025

Yes in the last 12 months 28%, Yes, previously 21%, No 43%, Unsure 6%

As Figure 4 shows, 29% of respondents had reported damp or mould to their landlord, including 13% who had done so in the last year. This finding is very similar to the 2025 finding and was consistent across most respondent groups, although those aged under 60 were more likely to have reported damp or mould.

Figure 4: Whether reported damp or mould to landlord

2026

Yes in the last 12 months 13%, Yes, previously 16%, No 70%, Unsure 2%

2025

Yes in the last 12 months 15%, Yes, previously 12%, No 70%, Unsure 3%

• Knowing who to speak to 39%
• Knowing whether it is the landlord's responsibility 20%
• Knowing whether it is worth reporting 30%
• Knowing whether the landlord would be able to 44%
• Preferring to raise it with someone else 5%
• Preferring to resolve the issue myself 5%
• None of the above 37%

Respondents were able to select multiple options.

The survey asked Panel members about anything that their landlord could do differently on damp and mould. Respondents were invited to answer in their own words.

Around 50 respondents provided written comment. Most of these referred to experience of damp or mould issues and expressed frustration about their landlord’s response to these - although some reported positive experience of their landlord’s response. Several respondents indicated that reported damp or mould issues remain unresolved.

Written comments highlighted the importance of resolving damp and mould issues first time. There were calls for landlords to respond more quickly and effectively to concerns. It was also suggested that landlords should include follow-up checks after allowing sufficient time to ensure that the cause of damp or mould has been resolved.

Around a quarter of those providing written comment felt that their landlord did not appear to take reports of damp or mould seriously enough. This included reference to the time that landlords had taken to respond to reports, and a perception that their response had not resolved the underlying cause of damp or mould. Several of those providing written comment suggested that their landlord had “blamed” tenants’ behaviour rather than dealing with the underlying cause.

Respondents referred to having had been affected by a range of factors that can contribute to damp or mould. These included poor ventilation, inadequate insulation and difficulty keeping their home warm, and water ingress. A small number reported having felt required to pay for dehumidifiers and other remedies at their own expense, due to what was described as an inadequate response from their landlord. It was suggested that further investment is required from landlords to improve properties affected by poor ventilation and heating/insulation.

Finally in relation to damp and mould, some wished to see landlord provide clearer information for tenants. This included on how to report concerns, what landlords will do in response, and what tenants can do to minimise the risk of damp and mould.

Heating your home

More than half of respondents (54%) had experienced difficulty heating their home, a 17-point reduction from the 2024 survey and in line with 2022 and 2021 results.

Energy costs were the main factor contributing to respondents’ difficulties heating their home – 80% mentioned this. Around half of respondents reported that poor heating (51%) or poor windows (51%) had contributed to heating difficulties.

In relation to heating, Panel members were asked whether they have had any difficulties heating their home (Figure 7), and about the factors that had contributed to any difficulties (Figure 8).

More than half of respondents (54%) had experienced difficulty heating their home. This included around a third of respondents (32%) who were experiencing difficulties at the time of the survey. The proportion of respondents who have experienced difficulties heating their home has reduced by 17-points from the 2024 survey (the last time a comparable question was asked), having fallen broadly in line with the 2022 and 2021 surveys.

The proportion of respondents who have experienced difficulties heating their home was broadly consistent across key respondent groups. Perhaps unsurprisingly, those who had experienced difficulty affording their rent were also more likely to have difficulty heating their home. More than 7 in 10 of those who had difficulty affording their rent had also struggled to heat their home.

Figure 7: Whether had difficulty heating home

• Having difficulty at the moment 32%
• Difficulties in the last year 11%
• Difficulties more than a year ago 11%
• Not had difficulties 46%

Time series - whether experienced difficulties 

• 2026 54%
• 2024 71%
• 2023 71%
• 2022 58%
• 2021 53%
• 202062%

Note: Respondents were able to select multiple options.

As Figure 8 shows, energy costs were the main issue contributing to difficulties heating the home. A large majority of respondents (80%) felt that energy costs had made it difficult for them to heat their home, including half of all respondents (50%) who felt energy costs have had a ‘significant impact’.

Other factors were less commonly mentioned, although around half of respondents indicated that a poor or inefficient heating system (51%) or poor windows (51%) had contributed to difficulty heating their home. Around 2 in 5 respondents (41%) indicated that poor insulation had contributed to difficulty heating their home.

These findings are broadly similar to previous surveys, with energy costs remaining the most commonly mentioned factor contributing to respondents’ difficulty heating their home.

Figure 8: Factors contributing to difficulty heating the home

• Energy costs Significant impact 50%, Slight impact 30%, No real impact 21%, Don't know 0%
• Poor/ineffective heating system Significant impact 23%, Slight impact 28%, No real impact 47%, Don't know 2%
• No insulation/poor insulation Significant impact 22%, Slight impact 19%, No real impact 53%, Don't know 6%
• Poor window/lack of double glazing Significant impact 26%, Slight impact 25%, No real impact 47%, Don't know 2%
• Other Significant impact 22%, Slight impact 10%, No real impact 47%, Don't know 22%

Time series

• Energy costs 2026 80%, 2024 88%, 2023 90%, 2022 85%, 2021 29%
• Poor/ineffective heating system 2026 51%, 2024 56%, 2023 49%, 2022 29%, 2021 28%
• No insulation/poor insulation 2026 41%, 2024 49%, 2023 48%, 2022 35%, 2021 36%
• Poor window/lack of double glazing 2026 51%, 2024 51%, 2023 52%, 2022 39%, 2021 43%

Figures may not sum to 100% due to rounding.

Zero emission heating

As Figure 9 shows, a large majority of respondents (92%) had heard of zero emission heating, including 73% who felt that they knew at least a little about this. Awareness levels were similar across key respondent groups.

Figure 9: Whether heard of zero emission heating

• Yes, know a lot about this 28%
• Yes, know a little about this 45%
• Heard of, but don't know much about it 19%
• Have not heard of this 8%

Panel members were also asked whether their home has a zero-emission heating system; 1 in 10 respondents (10%) reported that this was the case. In terms of the types of zero emission heating installed, these respondents referred to heat pumps – both air source and ground source – and solar panel heating.

Rents and value

Around half of respondents (49%) felt that their rent is good value for money, and more than a quarter (24%) felt their rent is poor value.

Nearly half of respondents (48%) have experienced difficulties affording their rent, nearly a third (31%) in the last year. Rent levels, heating and other living costs were seen as the main causes of rent difficulties.

The majority of respondents (72%) were concerned about the future affordability of their rent, most commonly linked to the potential impact of future rent increases.

A large majority (81%) had recently received information about rent increases from their landlord. Most of these respondents indicated that the information was clear on the proposed increase and asked for their views.

This section considers Panel member views and experiences around rents, including whether respondents feel their rent is value for money, rent affordability, and rent consultations.

Value for money

As Figure 10 shows, around half of respondents (49%) felt that their rent is good value for money, while more than a quarter (28%) felt their rent is poor value. The survey has shown some year-to-year variation in views on value for money, but this balance of views is broadly in line with findings across previous surveys. Views were broadly consistent across key respondent groups although older respondents and RTO members were more positive than others on value for money.

Figure 10: Whether rent is value for money

2026

• Very good value 23%, Fairly good value 26%, Neither good nor poor 23%, Fairly poor value 16%, Very  poor value 12%

2025

• Very good value 17%, Fairly good value 36%, Neither good nor poor 23%, Fairly poor value 17%, Very  poor value 6%

2024

• Very good value 14%, Fairly good value 35%, Neither good nor poor 16%, Fairly poor value 23%, Very  poor value 12%

2023

• Very good value 22%, Fairly good value 31%, Neither good nor poor 21%, Fairly poor value 16%, Very  poor value 10%

2022

• Very good value 15%, Fairly good value 33%, Neither good nor poor 25%, Fairly poor value 11%, Very  poor value 16%

The survey asked Panel members to expand on what they think about when judging whether rents are value for money. Written feedback members identified a range of considerations, most commonly relating to (i) the quality and responsiveness of their landlord services, (ii) the level and affordability of their rent, and (iii) the quality of their home including ease of keeping the home warm. Below we summarise the main points raised.

Service quality. The most commonly mentioned considerations related to the quality of service received from the landlord. Several respondents noted that the balance between their rent and service quality is fundamental to how they assess value for money. Repairs was the most commonly mentioned specific service area, including examples of emergency repairs requiring a rapid response, and to the importance of landlords getting repairs right first time. A number of respondents expressed frustration that they had to complain about repairs works where their landlord had not properly addressed the problem, and there was also a view that landlords making ‘patch’ repairs (e.g. rather than replacing a worn item) can gradually degrade the quality of their home.

The potential for service quality to impact (positively or negatively) on the quality and condition of their home was a key focus for some of those providing written comment. Other aspects of service quality referenced by respondents included:

• Accessibility of services in terms of being able to contact their landlord in a way that suits them, and how quickly landlords respond to service users.
• The manner of service staff including how effectively they are able to deal with service requests and queries, and more generally whether they demonstrate understanding and respect for tenants.

Rent levels and affordability were also commonly referenced in terms of how respondents judge value for money. This included comment on the extent to which respondents are able to afford their own rent, and wider considerations such as how their landlord’s rent levels compare with other options (social rented and private rented).

The size of rent increases was also a key focus for those providing written comment. Some cited specific percentage increases to their rent in recent years and compared with these with other landlords. There was also concern about the cumulative impact of annual increases, including comment from longer-standing tenants that their rent has increased substantially during their tenancy.

Home and heating. The quality of home was identified as a key concern for many of those providing comment, including in relation to the responsiveness of repairs services (as noted above). Other factors relating to quality of home that affect how respondents judge value for money included planned improvement works and capital investment (e.g. upgrading kitchens, bathrooms and heating systems), the effectiveness of other ongoing maintenance work, and suitability for particular needs such as wheelchair users or other disabilities.

Heating was also commonly referenced by respondents in relation to the quality of their home. A number of those providing comment indicated that energy efficiency and how easy their home is to keep warm contribute to whether they feel their rent is value for money. Respondents also highlighted the impact of energy efficiency and insulation in reducing their heating costs, and ultimately easing wider affordability pressures.

Other considerations that can affect value for money judgements included:

• Quality of local neighbourhood and how this is managed - including upkeep of common areas, dealing with neighbour problems or antisocial behaviour.
• Opportunities for tenants to engage in their landlord’s decision making, and whether tenants feel listened to by the landlord. This included specific reference to rent consultations, and also to landlord’s wider approach to participation and communication. This was seen as an important way that landlords can demonstrate respect for tenants.
• How landlords respond to issues and complaints.
• How efficiently the landlord operates as an organisation.

Rent affordability

Figure 11 summarises feedback on respondents’ experience of difficulties affording their rent. As this shows nearly half (48%) had experienced difficulties affording their rent, including nearly a third (31%) who had experienced difficulties in the last year and 11% who were experiencing difficulties at the time of the survey. Results are in line with those from the 2025 survey. Survey responses indicate that those aged under 60 were more likely to have experienced difficulty affording their rent.

Figure 11: Whether experienced difficulty affording rent

2026

• Having difficulties at the moment 12%, Difficulties in the last year 19%, Difficulties more than a year ago 18%, Not had difficulties 55%

2025

• Having difficulties at the moment 17%, Difficulties in the last year 15%, Difficulties more than a year ago 14%, Not had difficulties 54%

2024

• Having difficulties at the moment 12%, Difficulties in the last year 17%, Difficulties more than a year ago 24%, Not had difficulties 48%

2023

• Having difficulties at the moment 21%, Difficulties in the last year 21%, Difficulties more than a year ago 22%, Not had difficulties 41%

2022

• Having difficulties at the moment 7%, Difficulties in the last year 21%, Difficulties more than a year ago 15%, Not had difficulties 58%

2021

• Having difficulties at the moment 5%, Difficulties in the last year 12%, Difficulties more than a year ago 23%, Not had difficulties 60%

As Figure 12 shows, the level of rent was seen as the most significant factor contributing to rent affordability difficulties; 75% of those who had experienced difficulties mentioned this, and 53% felt this was the most important factor. Heating costs were also commonly mentioned (by 77%) but were less likely to be ranked as the most important factor (20%).

The overall mix of factors contributing to respondents’ rent difficulties was broadly similar to that reported in previous surveys, with rent levels and heating the home consistently identified as the main factors contributing to rent difficulties. However, there has been some year-to-year variation in the proportion of respondents mentioning specific factors, for example the proportion of respondents citing rent levels has increased since 2025.

Figure 12: Factors contributing to difficulty affording rent

• The level of rent Most important 53%, Top 3 75%
• Cost of eating your home Most important 20%, Top 3 77%
• Food costs Most important 4%, Top 3 57%
• Other living costs Most important 8%, Top 3 57%
• Reduction in pay Most important 14%, Top 3 14%
• Reduction in benefits Most important 2%, Top 3 6%

Respondents were able to select multiple options.

Time series: Top 3 factors

• The level of rent - 2026 75%, 2025 60%, 2024 59%, 2023 45%
• Cost of heating your home - 2026 77%, 2025 74%, 2024 67%, 2023 64%
• Food costs - 2026 57%, 2025 54%, 2024 46%, 2023 45%
• Other living costs - 2026 57%, 2025 57%, 2024 51%, 2023 49%
• Reduction in pay - 2026 14%, 2025 20%, 2024 31%, 2023 26%
• Reduction in benefits - 2026 6%, 2025 9%, 2024 8%, 2023 21%

Respondents were able to select multiple options.

Future affordability

As Figure 13 shows, the majority of respondents (72%) expressed concerns about affording their rent over the next few years, similar to the 2025 survey. Perhaps unsurprisingly, those who had experienced difficulty affording their rent were significantly more likely to express concerns; more than 9 in 10 of those who had experienced difficulties also expressed concerns about the future.

In terms of the nature of these concerns, these were most commonly related to rent increases. More than half of respondents (56%) were concerned about the impact of future rent increases on rent affordability. This compares with 12% who were concerned about future changes to their income, and 4% about future benefit changes.

Figure 13: Whether concerned about affording rent over next few years

2026

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 56%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 12%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 4%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 28%

2025

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 56%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 7%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 12%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 26%

2024

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 60%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 12%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 5%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 23%

2023

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 59%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 15%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 9%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 17%

2022

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 41%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 10%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 20%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 29%

2021

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 39%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 9%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 17%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 36%

2020

• Worried that rent increases will cause me problems 49%, Worried that income changes will cause me problems 7%, Worried that benefit changes will cause me problems 24%, Don't expect rent affordability to be a concern 20%

Rent consultation

A large majority of respondents (81%) indicated that they had received information about rent increases from their landlord in the last six months, with most of these (74%) having received information in the last three months. This is similar to results across previous surveys.

Figure 14: When last received information from landlord on rent increases

2026

• In the last 3 months 74%, In the last 6 months 6%, More than 6 months ago 19%, Never 1%

2025

• In the last 3 months 73%, In the last 6 months 14%, More than 6 months ago 12%, Never 1%

2024

• In the last 3 months 68%, In the last 6 months 15%, More than 6 months ago 3%, Never 14%

2023

• In the last 3 months 68%, In the last 6 months 13%, More than 6 months ago 5%, Never 14%

As Figure 15 shows, a large majority of those who had received information on rent increases felt that this was clear on what the rent increase would be and why (85%). A large majority (82%) also indicated that they were asked for their view on the proposed rent increase. RSL tenants were somewhat more likely than local authority tenants to report that they had been asked for their views.

Figure 15: Information provided by landlords on rent increases

• Was this clear on what the rent increase would be and why? Yes 85%, No 15%, Don't know/Can't remember 0%
• Ask for your views on the proposed rent increase? Yes 82%, No 14%, Don't know/can't remember 5%

The survey asked Panel members to expand on their most recent experience of receiving information from their landlord on rent increases. Key points are summarised below.

• What information was provided on rent increases? Most of those providing comment indicated that information from their landlord had stated the proposed level of rent increase, with some noting that this had included multiple increase options. Respondents also generally indicated that their landlord had provided a rationale for the proposed rent increase, although some specifically noted that this was not included. This contextual information had included references to inflation and increasing costs affecting services, comparison with other social landlords, and a breakdown of how rental income is used by the landlord. Some had also received information on the implications of different rent increase options for ongoing service standards.
• Were you satisfied with the information? Those providing comment were mixed in terms of their satisfaction with the information provided. Relatively few included a specific rationale for their satisfaction, but it is notable that most of those who were satisfied had been provided with multiple rent increase options, information on the rationale for proposed increases and/or options for tenants to provide their views. Dissatisfied respondents included several who felt that the information provided was limited, and for example did not include a proper rationale for the proposed rent increase. Some also noted that they had wished to see a 0% increase option.
• What options did you have to give your views? Respondents were divided on whether their landlord provided options to give their views on proposed rent increases, with some indicating that this had not been provided. Where tenants had been given options to share their views, this was most commonly via a survey or similar mechanism (including web-based, postal and telephone examples). Others indicated that email or telephone contact details had been provided, and several noted that they had opportunities to comment on proposed rent increases through RTOs or scrutiny activity.
• Were you satisfied with the options to give your views? Respondents were divided in terms of the options to give their views. Relatively few included detail on the basis for any satisfaction or dissatisfaction, but several respondents expressed a view that tenant input has little or no impact on landlord rent increase decisions. This included comment that very few tenants take part rent consultations.

Money and finances

Around a fifth (19%) of respondents were not managing well financially at the time of the survey, with 10% in financial difficulty.

Financial worries have affected a substantial proportion – 80% struggle with unexpected expenses and 35% often have to delay or miss paying a bill.

Most felt their financial circumstances were worse than 12 months ago (56%, a 14-point fall since 2025), with food and energy costs seen as the biggest contributors.

Around three quarters (76%) were concerned about their finances over the next few years.

This section considers Panel member views and experiences about their financial circumstances, how these have changed in the last 12 months, and how respondents feel about their future finances.

Current financial circumstances

As Figure 16 shows, around a fifth (19%) of respondents indicated that they are not managing well with their finances as a whole, including 10% who are in financial difficulties. These findings are similar to the 2025 survey, and were broadly consistent across most respondent groups - although younger respondents were more likely to be struggling financially.

Figure 16: How managing financially at the moment

2026

• Managing very well 7%, Managing quite well 26%, Get by alright 48%, Don't manage very well 9%, In financial difficulties 10%

2025

• Managing very well 8%, Managing quite well 27%, Get by alright 46%, Don't manage very well 14%, In financial difficulties 4%

2024

• Managing very well 7%, Managing quite well 21%, Get by alright 50%, Don't manage very well 13%, In financial difficulties 8%

2023

• Managing very well 5%, Managing quite well 21%, Get by alright 48%, Don't manage very well 13%, In financial difficulties 12%

2022

• Managing very well 16%, Managing quite well 18%, Get by alright 42%, Don't manage very well 11%, In financial difficulties 14%

2021

• Managing very well 20%, Managing quite well 19%, Get by alright 38%, Don't manage very well 9%, In financial difficulties 13%

2020

• Managing very well 6%, Managing quite well 23%, Get by alright 40%, Don't manage very well 11%, In financial difficulties 20%

Figure 17 summarises views on specific aspects of respondents’ current financial circumstances. Consistent with findings noted above, results show that financial worries have affected a relatively substantial proportion of respondents:

• More than a third (35%) often have to delay or miss paying a bill.
• Nearly two thirds (63%) are not able to save money most months.
• Unexpected household expenses often cause difficulty or stress for a large majority of respondents (80%).
• Money worries have a bad effect on relationships for half of respondents (50%).

Also consistent with findings noted earlier, those aged under 60 were most likely to have experienced financial worries. This was particularly so in relation to often having to delay or miss bills, and being unable to save money.

Figure 17: Views on current financial circumstances

• I can save money most months - 2% strongly agree, 35% agree, 36% disagree, 26% strongly disagree
• I often have to delay or miss paying a bill - 16% strongly agree, 19% agree, 41% disagree, 24% strongly disagree
• Unexpected household expenses often cause me difficulty/stress - 38% strongly agree, 42% agree, 10% disagree, 10% strongly disagree
• Money worries have a bad effect on my relationships with family and friends - 25% strongly agree, 25% agree, 26% disagree, 25% strongly disagree

Time series 

• I can save money most months - 2026 37%, 2025 25%, 2024 33%, 2023 35% 2022 37%, 2021 41%
• I often have to delay paying a bill - 2026 35%, 2025 38%, 2024 30%, 2023 35% 2022 32%, 2021 21%
• Unexpected household expenses often cause me difficulty/stress - 2026 80%, 2025 75%, 2024 79%, 2023 73% 2022 62%, 2021 61%
• Money worries have a bad effect on my relationships - 2026 50%, 2025 43%, 2024 37%, 2023 42% 2022 37%, 2021 38%

Financial circumstances over the last 12 months

As Figure 18 shows, more than half of respondents felt that their financial circumstances are worse now than 6-12 months ago (51% felt they are worse than 6 months ago and 56% worse than 12 months ago).

This represents a 14-point reduction since 2025 in the proportion of respondents who felt worse off than a year ago. Findings were broadly consistent across key respondent groups, although RSL tenants and under 60s were more likely than others to feel worse off than a year ago.

Figure 18: How current financial circumstances compare with 6, 12 and 24 months ago

• 6 months ago - 18% significantly worse, 33% slightly worse, 36% no real change, 9% slightly better, 4% significantly better 
• 12 months ago - 23% significantly worse, 33% slightly worse, 36% no real change, 6% slightly better, 2% significantly better 
• 2 years ago - 34% significantly worse, 29% slightly worse, 20% no real change, 13% slightly better, 4% significantly better 

Time series: Finances now compared with 12 months ago

• 2026 - 23% significantly worse, 33% slightly worse, 36% no real change, 6% slightly better, 2% significantly better 
• 2025 - 32% significantly worse, 39% slightly worse, 21% no real change, 6% slightly better, 3% significantly better 
• 2024 - 30% significantly worse, 26% slightly worse, 29% no real change, 11% slightly better, 5% significantly better 
• 2023 - 36% significantly worse, 40% slightly worse, 13% no real change, 9% slightly better, 2% significantly better 

Figure 19 highlights the factors that have affected respondents’ finances over the last 12 months.

This shows that food, energy and other living costs were the most commonly mentioned factors affecting respondents’ financial circumstances. The great majority of respondents mentioned at least one of these issues, including more than half who felt that these have had a “significant impact” on their finances (65% for food costs and 61% for energy costs). Results were broadly similar to previous surveys, with food and energy costs consistently the most commonly mentioned factors affecting finances.

Figure 19: Factors affecting financial circumstances in the last 12 months

• Reduction in pay - 14% significant impact, 16% slight impact, 55% no real impact, 14% don't know 
• Reduction in benefits - 15% significant impact, 17% slight impact, 55% no real impact, 13% don't know
• Rent or mortgage increase - 27% significant impact, 38% slight impact, 32% no real impact, 3% don't know 
• Increased energy costs - 61% significant impact, 25% slight impact, 12% no real impact, 1% don't know 
• Increased food costs  - 65% significant impact, 29% slight impact, 5% no real impact, 1% don't know 
• Increased other living costs - 51% significant impact, 38% slight impact, 9% no real impact, 2% don't know 

Time series 

• Reduction in pay - 2026 30%, 2025 26%, 2024 32%, 2023 40%
• Reduction in benefits - 2026 32%, 2025 37%, 2024 31%, 2023 31% 
• Rent or mortgage increases - 2026 65%, 2025 63%, 2024 58%, 2023 55%
• Increased energy costs - 2026 87%, 2025 90%, 2024 94%, 2023 95%
• Increased food costs - 2026 94%, 2025 94%, 2024 94%, 2023 96%
• Increased other living costs - 2026 89%, 2025 91%, 2024 93%, 2023 91%

Views on future financial circumstances

As Figure 20 shows, around three quarters of respondents (76%) expressed concern about their financial circumstances over the next few years. This included 27% for whom their future financial situation was a “major concern”.

This represents a 12-point decrease since 2025 in the proportion of respondents who are concerned about their future financial circumstances, although findings are broadly in line with 2022-2024 survey results.

Figure 20: Expectations for finances over next few years

2026

• 27% I think my financial situation will be a major concern, 49% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 20% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 4% unsure 

2025

• 41% I think my financial situation will be a major concern, 47% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 8% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 4% unsure 

2024

• 29% I think my financial situation will be a major concern, 48% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 16% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 7% unsure 

2023

• 33% I think my financial situation will be a major concern, 49% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 12% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 6% unsure 

2022

• 36% I think my financial situation will be a major concern, 40% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 19% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 5% unsure 

2021

• 12% I think my financial situation will be a major concern,  42% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 31% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 15% unsure 

2020

• 15% I think my financial situation will be a major concern, 55% I think my financial situation will be a concern to some degree, 22% I don't expect my financial situation to be a concern, 8% unsure 

Information on landlord performance

More than 2 in 5 respondents had seen information from their landlord about Annual Assurance Statements (45%).

A large majority (85%) felt that Annual Assurance Statements provide information that is relevant to them, and 64% felt that they provide accurate information.

All types of performance information were seen as important, with indicators relating to repairs services generally rated as most important.

This section considers Panel members’ views and experiences on landlord performance information.

Annual Assurance Statements

Annual Assurance Statements are a requirement on social landlords to provide assurance that the landlord is meeting the standards and requirements set out by the Scottish Housing Regulator.

More than 2 in 5 respondents (45%) indicated that they had seen information from their landlord about Annual Assurance Statements, similar to the 2023 survey (the last survey for which comparable data is available). Survey responses indicate that RTO members were more likely than others to have seen such information.

As Figure 21 shows, a large majority of respondents (85%) felt that Annual Assurance Statements provide information that is relevant to them. The majority (64%) also felt that Statements provide accurate information, although 17% of respondents disagreed with this. Younger respondents were most likely to be sceptical about the accuracy of Annual Assurance Statements.

Figure 21: Views on Annual Assurance Statements

• Annual Assurance Statements provide information that is relevant to me - Strongly agree 26%, Agree 58%, Neither/nor 13%, Disagree 1%, Strongly disagree 1%
• I am confident that the landlord's Annual Assurance Statement provides accurate information - Strongly agree 26%, Agree 39%, Neither/nor 19%, Disagree 9%, Strongly disagree 9%

Panel members were invited to provide further written comment in support of their responses to the above questions. A minority of respondents provided written comment here. This included some expressing a positive view on the importance of landlords providing tenants with clear information about standards being met. Several respondents also praised the quality of Annual Assurance Statements in relation to the relevance of content, and accessibility in terms of layout/design and clear use of language.

Others were less positive about Annual Assurance Statements. This was most commonly related to distrust of the information provided, and the data collection and verification processes used - “the statistics have to be taken on trust”. There were also calls for Statements to include information on how landlords take account of tenant input in their service delivery and decision making.

Performance information topics

The survey and qualitative engagement also sought views on landlord performance information, with Panel members first asked to rate the importance of different types of performance information.

As Figure 22 shows, respondents rated all of the listed types of performance information as important. Indicators relating to repairs services were generally rated as most important; response to emergency repairs, repairs being completed right first time and repairs appointments being kept each averaged 6.8 out of 7.

Other indicators rated as particularly important were response to antisocial behaviour (6.7), level of rent increases (6.6), tenant satisfaction with services (6.6) and whether tenants feel their landlord is good at keeping them informed (6.6).

Figure 22: Importance of landlord performance information topics (scored out of 7)

Repairs

• Response to emergency repairs - 6.8
• Response to non-emergency repairs - 6.0
• Repairs being completed right first time - 6.8
• Repairs appointments kept - 6.8

Rents

• Your rent and how it compares with other landlords - 6.4
• Level of rent increases - 6.6

Other

• Response to antisocial behaviour - 6.7
• How quickly vacant properties are let - 6.0
• Whether tenants are satisfied with services - 6.6
• Whether tenants feel landlord is good at keeping them informed - 6.6

The qualitative engagement strand with Panel members (see The 2025/26 programme) further explored views on the landlord performance information that matters most to tenants and service users.

Performance information and SHR landlord reports

Feedback from qualitative participants expanded on the relative importance of specific types of performance information listed at Figure 22. This is summarised below.

Quality of home, maintenance and repairs. The responsiveness of repairs services was a priority for all participants, and was highlighted as essential in ensuring the quality of tenants’ homes. This included performance information related to emergency repairs and structural or safety issues, and also more minor repairs that might be termed ‘cosmetic’ but which can have a significant impact for tenants.

Some noted that measures of repair response times alone are not enough, and wished to see information on the quality of repair works and ensuring that repairs provide a permanent fix for tenants. The number of complaints raised about repair works was suggested as a potential indicator here. In addition to repairs services, some wished to see performance information on heating costs and energy efficiency of homes – this was identified as a key concern for some.

Scottish Housing Regulator

Respondents generally prefer to receive information about the SHR via email newsletters from SHR (64%), the SHR website (50%), or coverage in their own landlord’s newsletters or website (47%).

Nearly all respondents would be interested in using the SHR website, most commonly to get information on their landlord’s performance (97%), to learn more about SHR (97%), or to report an issue or concern (92%).

The final part of the survey asked Panel members preferences for getting information about SHR, and use of the SHR website. Qualitative engagement was also used to explore how Panel members may prefer to receive SHR information.

Getting information about SHR

As Figure 23 shows, respondents generally prefer to receive information about SHR via email newsletters from SHR (64% mentioned this), information on the SHR website (50%), and/or coverage in their own landlord’s newsletters/website (47%).

Survey responses show some variation in preferences across respondent groups; for example RSL tenants were more likely to prefer the Regulator’s website and female respondents were more likely to prefer news articles in the media. Variation was also evident across age groups, with younger respondents generally more likely than others to prefer social media, videos and podcasts.

Figure 23: How prefer to receive information about the SHR

• Information on the Regulator's website: 2026 50%, 2025 62%
• Podcasts: 2026 8%, 2025 3%
• Videos: 2026 7%, 2025 6%
• Newsletters from the Regulator by email: 2026 64%
• Coverage in your landlord's newsletter/website: 2026 47%
• News articles in the media: 2026 24%, 2025 15%
• Social Media: 2026 16%, 2025 27%
• Other: 2026 7%, 2025 6%

Respondents were able to select multiple options. Additional answer options were added for the 2026 survey – 2025 comparator results are not available for these.

Qualitative engagement was used to gather further detail on preferences for accessing information about SHR. As noted earlier (see The 2025/26 programme), this involved engagement with 23 Panel members to explore views on different means of accessing information, and why participants prefer particular options. Key points are summarised below.

• Email and website. As Figure 23 shows, these were the most commonly preferred means of accessing information for qualitative participants. Qualitative participants noted that they typically use these options every day for personal and work purposes, and as such they are a ‘natural’ choice for accessing information on SHR. There was specific support for email as a means of enabling interested individuals to sign-up for information, such that they do not have to pro-actively check websites for updates. There was also reference to email newsletters and/or service user ‘portals’ as enabling individuals to receive alerts for the news or information that interests them. It was also noted that email newsletters can be easily saved to read later.
• Social media. Participants expressing a preference for social media indicated that this fits with their existing use of social media, and noted that this already includes using social media to access news on public agencies and other services. This was described as a useful way for individuals to “come across things” of potential interest, and as an effective means for SHR to reach out to potentially interested people. The ease of accessing social media information by smartphone was also noted – some appeared to find this less easy for other web-based information.
• Podcasts and other audio or video. As noted above in relation to Figure 23, survey results indicate that younger respondents were more likely than others to prefer audio/visual options. A small number of qualitative participants also suggested that people aged under 40 typically prefer to access information digitally. These participants indicated that they find podcasts and other audio/visual formats more engaging, and also suggested that they can be particularly useful for those who may have difficulty with written information. However, a small number of participants noted that they do not use podcasts or similar media and would be unlikely to change this to access SHR information.
• Coverage of SHR activity in landlord’s own newsletters or websites. While email or website was preferred by most qualitative participants, relatively few indicated a preference for their own landlord’s email or website specifically. Those who did prefer this option noted that landlord newsletters and websites are particularly convenient where service users are already familiar with accessing information or contacting their landlord in this way.
• Non-digital options. A small number of primarily older participants referred to letters and printed newsletters as their preferred options. It was also suggested that this option may be especially useful for service users who do not typically use digital media as a way of accessing information.
• Other options were suggested by several qualitative participants. These included information via third sector agencies and others who may be engaging with users of social landlord services, information via Snapchat, SMS or WhatsApp messages with links to web-based information, a dedicated SHR app and use of AI to support engagement with SHR information.

As noted earlier (see Figure 23), survey results indicate that there may be differences across age groups in how individuals prefer to access SHR information. Qualitative discussions supported this with further examples of variation in preferences by age. Feedback linked to specific age groups included:

• Those aged under 40 wanted to be able to access information through the channels or methods they already use, and noted that this is typically via digital means such as email, social media and websites. Being able to access or save information for a time that suits them was also important. For example, there was some preference for options that do not require individuals to seek out news or information – “you can ignore them if you’re not interested or until you have time”.
• Older respondents (aged 60+) also referred to accessing information through the options that they already use. This included a preference for information being available through landlord websites and emails that individuals are familiar with. Feedback was more mixed on audio/visual options – several older participants were regular podcast listeners, but others indicated that this was of no interest to them.

Use of SHR website

Nearly all respondents indicated that they would be interested in using the Regulator’s website for one or more of the reasons listed at Figure 24. Interest was most widespread in relation to:

• Getting information on how their landlord is performing (97% would be interested, including 61% ‘definitely’ interested).
• Learning more about the Regulator and what it does (97%, 59% ‘definitely’).
• To report an issue or concern (92%, 61% ‘definitely’).

These results show some increase since 2025 in the proportion of respondents who would ‘definitely’ be interested in using the SHR website to access the listed information. This was most notable in relation to getting information on landlord performance and learning about the Regulator’s work.

Figure 24: Interest in using SHR website in the future

• Get information on how your landlord is performing: definitely 61%, possibly 36%, definitely not 1%, unsure 2%
• Get information on how other landlords are performing: definitely 55%, possibly 36%, definitely not 5%, unsure 4%
• Learn more about the Regulator and what it does: definitely 59%, possibly 38%, definitely not 2%, unsure 1%
• Find out how to get involved in your landlord's decision-making: definitely 52%, possibly 41%, definitely not 6%, unsure 2%
• Report an issue or concern: definitely 61%, possibly 31%, definitely not 6%, unsure 3%

Time series - would definitely consider using

• Get information on how your landlord is performing: 2026 61%, 2025 51%
• Get information on how other landlords are performing: 2026 55%, 2025 44%
• Learn more about the Regulator and what it does: 2026 59%, 2025 49%
• Find out how to get involved in your landlord's decision-making: 2026 52%, 2025 43%
• Report an issue or concern: 2026 61%, 2025 56%

The small number of respondents who indicated that they would not use the SHR website included those who are not interested in regulatory activity or comparison of landlord performance, those who questioned the value of SHR’s work, and those who do not like to use the internet.

Users of homelessness services

The second qualitative engagement strand involved people with experience of homelessness services. Discussions considered experiences around accessing services, temporary accommodation, and (for those at this stage) of accessing a permanent home of their own.

Findings are based on qualitative interviews with 36 households. Interviews have provided valuable feedback on the experience and views of service users, but findings should be treated as illustrative rather than representative of the wider population.

Accessing services

Engagement first looked at individuals’ experience of accessing services.

A substantial number of participants indicated that this had been their first experience of homelessness services. These participants had very little awareness or understanding of services prior to presenting as homeless, and it was clear that this had a significant impact on experience of accessing services.

In terms of practical impact, several participants had been helped to access services by family or friends or existing support services. For some, this support had been vital in enabling them to navigate services. However, those without access to (formal or informal) support could find the process of accessing services lonely and isolating. Several reported having felt extremely vulnerable at this time. For example, there were instances of individuals making an initial approach to services and being asked to return at the end of the day, leaving them to wait a whole day without any funds or access to indoor space.

Anxiety and uncertainty around accessing services were also commonly referenced by participants, especially those with no prior experience of services. Uncertainty was typically focused on whether and how services would be able to help, and the type of accommodation that might be available. This had been a major contributor to anxiety at the time of presenting for many participants, especially for households with children, those with health or disability-related needs, and those leaving care (for whom this could feel like a “backwards” step to less secure circumstances).

Gypsy / Traveller site residents

The third qualitative engagement strand involved residents of Gypsy/Traveller sites provided by social landlords. This strand was focused on experience of landlord engagement and views on landlords’ approach to communication and participation with residents.

Findings are based on survey interviews with 17 residents with experience of social rented sites. This strand of work has provided valuable feedback on the experience and views of site residents, but findings should be treated as illustrative rather than representative of the wider population.

The importance of effective engagement

As noted over the page, participants were varied in the extent of any experience of landlord engagement exercises. However, a clear view emerged through resident feedback that it is important for site residents to be able to influence their landlord’s decisions.

Most participants wished to see opportunities for residents to share meaningful feedback, and to ensure that landlords take genuine account of resident input in their decision-making processes. This included reference to residents feeling “listened to”. Landlords making the effort to engage with residents was also seen as demonstrating respect for Gypsy/Travellers’ wellbeing, and recognising the value of their input.

This was also linked to views about whether landlords understand residents’ culture and needs. Some suggested that their landlord does not appear to appreciate the distinctiveness of Gypsy/Traveller priorities or concerns, or the specific experience of living on a traveller site. This included comments highlighting the extent to which this differs from the experience of social tenants in bricks and mortar housing.

Several participants cited specific examples where they felt their landlord had demonstrated a lack of understanding of their culture and experiences. This included site design and pitch layout as part of improvement works leading to problems with drainage and keeping homes warm.

Annex: Panel membership

The Panel seeks to engage with a good cross-section of tenants and service users. Current members include social tenants, people who have used homelessness services, residents of social rented Gypsy/Traveller sites and owners using social landlord factoring services. In terms of the wider Panel profile, the focus is on ensuring membership includes representation across all socio-demographic groups, rather than achieving an exact match to the wider service user population. In this context, some groups such as those in rural areas have been over-sampled to ensure sufficient volume for more focused engagement within these groups.

Ensuring a balanced Panel membership is also a key element of ongoing promotion and recruitment work. This seeks to expand the reach of the Panel in terms of the size of the membership and representation of specific population subgroups. Total Panel membership was 404 at March 2026.

A profile of the current Panel membership is provided below.

Table 1: Profile of current National Panel membership

Figures may not sum to 100% due to rounding.