A leading councillor has underlined the pressure that the cost of temporary housing has put on Brighton and Hove City Council’s budget in recent years.
And Labour councillor Jacob Taylor told members of the council’s People and Place Overview and Scrutiny Committees that council tax payers’ money should not be going into the pockets of private landlords.
The number of households in temporary accommodation reached a five-year high of 2,170 in November and December.
The council had budgeted £8 million for temporary and emergency housing in the current financial year but the bill had soared to £20 million.
And nearly 50 homeless households a week were assessed as being “owed a duty” to be housed by the council over the past year.
During the meeting at Hove Town Hall on Thursday (19 February), Councillor Taylor said that the more than doubling of the cost of temporary housing was “exceptional”.
He said that it was one of the reasons why the council had asked to borrow £15 million from the government in “exceptional financial support”.
But nothing would be resolved in the long term without fixing what Councillor Taylor called “the underlying issue”.
The Labour deputy leader said: “We should not have any homeless households in the city or the country.
“We’re a rich, advanced economy. We shouldn’t have people living in temporary accommodation. They should be in settled accommodation.”
This might be a home of their own, if they could afford to buy one, or a privately rented flat or house – or public housing such as a council flat.
He said: “What we can’t keep doing is just chucking the revenue budget at the issue because that £20 million pressure is not funding for families.
“Every single penny of it is going to private landlords because that’s how temporary accommodation is provided – and we don’t have enough in-house.
“Our overall approach is trying to fix the issue. We announced last year a plan to rapidly buy as many properties as possible to bring them in-house because, when the properties are in-house, it doesn’t cost us on the revenue budget.
“So that £15 million we are seeking from the government, which we hope to get confirmed soon, is to help facilitate and support that and fix the underlying issues.”
The draft budget also capital spending plans of £112 million to buy or build new homes.
The annual budget council meeting is due to take place at Hove Town Hall from 4.30pm on Thursday (26 February). The meeting is scheduled to be webcast.
He says that a lot of it is because it goes to private landlords yet my disabled (with a blue badge) mother has been in a studio flat for 14 years and bid on tons of properties that are never given to her. And her flat is owned by seaside homes so that costs more for the council..
The council haven’t even got her down properly as not being able to do stairs or they didn’t when I last talked to her about it.
And one of the properties they let her view had stairs and she struggled to get half way up.
So whilst I understand that there are a lot of people needing housing because they can’t afford private renting or buying especially in this town the council are also to blame for this temporary housing situation.
For decades, the Council has relied on ad hoc, short notice placements in Houses in Multiple Occupation—often at significant public expense—despite longstanding concerns that much of this accommodation falls far below acceptable standards. Many properties have been repeatedly described as poorly maintained, outdated, and inconsistent with the principles of the Decent Homes Standard. BHCC has been lining the pockets of slum HMO landlords while looking the other way for decades. This is financial malfeasance and has all the hallmarks of corruption.
Equally troubling are the perceptions that long term dependence on the same small group of landlords, combined with the absence of structured contractual oversight and contracts, has created an environment lacking in transparency and robust financial governance. “Spot purchasing,” by definition, is intended for exceptional and urgent situations—not as a routine mechanism for meeting ongoing housing obligations year after year. There are no contracts, no assessments of fair market value, no value metrics… just shelling out hugs bungs of cash to slum landlords and looking the other way.
This prolonged approach raises serious questions about value for money, accountability, and stewardship of public funds. It has placed significant strain on local budgets and eroded public confidence. A full, independent review would be an appropriate and necessary step to restore trust and ensure rigorous oversight.
It’s a good summarisation, and it highlight why I personally think that bringing TA in-house is the right move, pardon the pun. Reducing spot purchases has to be a key driver to saving money, because it’s the most expensive way of housing people. I would also add that the city needs more housing being built at a steady pace, there’s only so much you can do with a finite resource when the maximum capacity remains too low. I agree that HMOs, in particular, need stronger oversight, and I honestly don’t see that happening in private providers. I’ve experienced, and I’ve heard the experiences of others where some of these accommodations are advertised as being Safe Havens, but ultimate fall short, being spaces where drug dealing was rife, that resident concerns were being ignored, and that criminal elements was being allowed to fester unchallenged.
When can we see the full details for the £19million emergency accommodation contract to a fledgling provider that Council Leader Bella Sankey rushed through on 2nd Jan 2026, allegedly with no Procurement oversight or Chief Financial Officer involvement? If this is refused because it is “commercially sensitive”, this is a resigning issue! This is not a time to play fast and loose with council finances when every penny counts and must be accounted for.
If you keep hammering good landlords you’re only going to leave bad ones!
The council themselves have a terrible reputation for keeping their own properties in a decent condition.
Sadly unless you arrive in a rubber dingy many locals are going to end up in tents/caravans.
Data has been trending positively on clearing out the repair backlog.
Councillor Taylor is right to highlight the sheer scale of the problem. When a budgeted £8 million turns into a £20 million bill, taxpayers are entitled to ask hard questions about how public money is being managed. No one disputes that homelessness must be addressed, but continually funnelling millions into short-term, high-cost arrangements with private landlords is clearly not sustainable.
There also needs to be honesty about the structural failures that have built up over many years. Reliance on expensive spot-purchasing and poor-quality HMOs did not happen overnight. It reflects a lack of long-term planning and weak oversight. Before borrowing more money, the council should demonstrate that it can manage existing housing stock efficiently and transparently.
Benjamin is correct to point out that reducing spot purchases and bringing more temporary accommodation in-house could help control costs. That is a sensible, pragmatic step. His comment about the repair backlog trending positively is welcome as well — if true, it suggests some operational improvements are being made. However, improvement in data trends must translate into visible, consistent standards across all council-managed properties. Residents will judge by lived experience, not spreadsheets.
Ultimately, the priority should be restoring financial discipline, strengthening oversight of both private and council-run housing, and increasing supply in a measured, accountable way. Compassion and competence must go hand in hand — but so must prudence with taxpayers’ money.