What the Reformed Decent Homes Standard Means for Stock Condition Surveys

Written by Ben Davidson, Head of Survey Services at Pennington Choices, where he oversees large and complex stock condition and energy performance certificate contracts. 

This is the second blog of our five-part series, where our experts explore the Decent Homes Standard reforms, focusing on how changes to the standard impact stock condition surveys and the role of accurate asset data. 

The review of the Decent Homes Standard (DHS) is long overdue. From someone working with stock condition data daily, assessing components, and working closely with housing providers, the updates are welcome. However, some of the proposed changes raise important questions about how they will work in practice for consultants, surveyors, and landlords alike.  

What's changing?

From a stock condition perspective, the most notable proposed changes include: 

• Updates to the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) 
• Failure under State of Repair based solely on the condition of component, not condition and age
• Introduction of a new, standalone damp and mould criterion 

Let’s look at what these changes will mean for organisations.  

Criterion A: Homes meet the current statutory minimum standard

Whilst Criterion A remains unchanged under the reformed DHS, the Government is considering the outcomes of the HHSRS review that concluded in 2022. This is a welcome step forward as the original model was based on 2004 data, which is now 20 years out of date. An updated evidence base will improve the relevance and accuracy of assessments and help housing professionals make better decisions. 

Criterion B: Homes meet a reasonable state of repair 

One of the biggest and most complex proposed changes is the removal of age requirements from the assessment of building components. Historically, DHS assessments have considered both the age and condition of components. This helped standardise surveys and supported long-term investment planning. 

This change raises real operational stock condition challenges: 

• Inconsistent condition judgements: Without lifecycle benchmarks, different organisations and surveyors will have different definitions of what “poor”, “average”, and “good” condition looks like. That means more variation in how surveys are carried out and how data is interpreted. 

• Increased training demands: Surveyors will need tailored briefings based on how each organisation interprets the requirements, especially where internal standards or scoring logic vary. This adds time and complexity to project mobilisation and delivery. 

• Blurring the line with repairs: We risk drifting into repairs territory. Issues like broken handles or minor cosmetic damage may now fall under Stock Condition Surveys, tasks traditionally handled by responsive repairs. This creates confusion around responsibility and scope.  

That said, proposed updates to the list of key and non-key components (to reflect new materials, renewable technologies, and modern property features) are a positive step. 

To find out what the changes to Criterion B will mean for repairs and maintenance, head over to our dedicated blog, ‘How Repairs and Maintenance Teams Can Prepare for the New Decent Homes Standard’.

Criterion E: Homes should be free of damp and mould (New criterion) 

The proposed introduction of a new Criterion E, focused on damp and mould, responds to growing public and regulatory concern. Whilst this hazard is already covered under HHSRS, giving it dedicated attention could improve consistency and drive action. 

However, there is a risk that responsibilities are being duplicated between the two requirements. Further clarity will be needed when the consultation concludes to prevent confusion and ensure the new criterion enhances Stock Condition Surveys rather than complicates them. 

What does this mean for providers?

With many organisations currently focused on Awaab’s Law and the new consumer standards, the DHS reforms might feel like just another addition to an already full regulatory agenda. 

But this consultation marks the first meaningful movement on Decent Homes in years. Whilst we cannot act fully until the final guidance is published, providers should engage with the consultation, review current data quality, and start internal conversations around how these changes could affect future planning. 

From a stock condition perspective, the most important thing now is to ensure that housing providers, consultants, surveyors, firms, and any other affected parties are involved in the consultation to shape the standard into what the sector needs.  

If you’re looking for expert support in understanding the condition of your stock, get in touch with our team to arrange a comprehensive Stock Condition Survey.

Explore the next blog in our expert series, 'Reformed Decent Homes Standard: Component life cycles and compliance challenges', which examines how the removal of component life cycles will impact surveying. 

Discover the fourth blog in our expert series, ‘How the New Decent Homes Standard Will Impact Repairs and Maintenance’, for insights into the operational challenges and opportunities facing repairs and maintenance teams. 

Read the first blog in our expert series, ‘Decent Homes Standard Reform: Transforming Strategic Asset Management’, to understand how the new standard will create a new landscape for strategic asset management.