The number of households in temporary housing has reached a new high in Brighton and Hove.
The previous five-year high was set in November and December last year, with 2,170 households in temporary housing – but the figure has gone up every month so far this year.
At the end of June, there were 2,292 households living in temporary housing.
In the first six months of the year, nearly 50 households a week were assessed by Brighton and Hove City Council as qualifying as homeless and in need of housing.
The biggest increase was recorded in March, with 192. Of those, 77 households needed a home because a private rented tenancy had ended.
And 43 needed somewhere to live because family and friends were no longer willing to accommodate, and 15 requiring a home due to domestic abuse.
The need for housing because of domestic abuse reached its highest point in June, with 32 households in need.
Temporary housing is one of the big pressures on the budget, the council said, with a report last month forecasting a £1.3 million overspend on the £14.6 million budget.
The pressure comes not just from the increasing numbers needing help but from the high cost of temporary housing combined with a continued reliance on nightly booked emergency housing.
The council is aiming, though, to reduce the number of households in nightly booked housing from 444 to 181 by next March.
Councillors and officials want to reduce the cost of paying private landlords for temporary housing and the council has been awarded £16.4 million from the government’s Local Authority Housing Fund to buy homes to use as temporary housing.
Labour councillor Gill Williams, the council’s cabinet member for housing, said: “This council is committed to supporting people to access safe, secure and affordable homes.
“Unfortunately, we do see high demand for our homelessness support services locally, including temporary accommodation.
“We continue to take significant steps to reduce demand for temporary accommodation, including increasing the number of affordable and council-owned rental homes across the city and working to improve the stability of private rental properties in Brighton and Hove.
“Our Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2025 to 2030 focuses firmly on the prevention of homelessness and rough sleeping and makes specific provision for supporting children, families and young people.
“That strategy shows our shift towards early intervention and to providing support before homelessness occurs.
“There is no quick fix to what is an incredibly complex issue but we are determined to do all we can to support people into secure, affordable and quality housing and are providing investment to match that commitment.
“If residents are concerned about their housing situation, then please contact us as soon as possible so that we can do all we can to keep them in their home and avoid the need for temporary accommodation.”
Sadly this is only the start, my sister volunteers for a homeless charity, Landlords are running for the hills, whilst it maybe a initial win for the tenants that Landlords can’t serve you 2 months notice they now are being ultra cautious on who they are letting in, ie if you have a ccj then tent for you, home owning guarantors are becoming the norm, So well done Labour for letting loads in and adopting this law that the tories quietly shelved because they saw the consequences.
The Reform Bill is an excellent start, because I don’t believe we should accept substandard accommodations under the threat of selling up. What it does mean though, for me at least, is a renewed focus is required to try to catch up with social house building, AMLOs, and accountable providers. The bubble of private landlords are a consequence of wealth inequality, in my opinion. It is something the previous Conservative government completely failed to address, alongside their poor choice to defunding the roads – the consequences of which we are seeing now.
Give migrants housing and punish landlords = no housing left. Simple. Yeah Labour
Migrants have no right to housing in law. What you are describing is the fear-based narrative typically peddled by Reform, unfortunately. Luckily, it’s simply not true.
The situation is likely to worsen with residential landlords exiting the market en masse because of additional costs being imposed by the council, regulatory changes and poor return on investment (vs. other investment vehicles). Depleted rental stock drive up rents and benefits those landlords who chose to stay in the market to the detriment of tenants – higher rents, fewer properties. Sale prices of flats in Hove have fallen 10-15% I the last 2 years, in part because of landlords seeking to unload rental flats. The June 2025 RICS survey recorded landlord instructions at a net balance of -21%, with agents describing a continuing pattern of landlords selling up because of regulatory changes and concerns about the Renters’ Rights reforms. Locally, Aston Vaughan’s 2026 Brighton & Hove rental update states that available rental properties remain at very low levels and that new instructions are not keeping pace with tenant demand. BHCC is aware of the unintended consequences of imposing further burden on landlords but have pressed ahead nonetheless. BHCC (we, the people!) will end up footing the bill for the burden imposed by regulators that are driving landlords out of the market and increasing demands for temporary accommodation.
I believe the whole thing is to drive property sale prices down and get Landlords out of the market so corporations like Lloyds Bank, Legal and General take over.
Unfortunately the government are not really in it for us but themselves. I believe the stamp duty avoiding Hove resident is now worth £5m and even last month go paid £20k for 2hrs talking to property professionals at a swanky London dinner, nice work if you can get it.
Check the register of members interests on the Gov website, you’ll be shocked.
Question for you both, do you believe that housing should be an investment vehicle, especially when the need to address inequality is so dire?
I believe it’s going to be now, mum and pop will be better than institutions.
“You have to feel sorry for the landlords” is a tough sell. I’m surprised you bothered.
Too many people coming to soft touch UK and BHCC The worst !
BHCC have very few migrants compared to the rest of the UK. And migration is significantly down and improving since Labour got into government. Ironically, the most damaging action undertaken to migration control was Brexit, ending the Dublin III Regulation – which is about sending people back to their country of origin.
And guess who’s currently peddling that idea? Farage. Can you see how they literally engineered the problem to cause outrage? Some would describe that as manipulation and an insult to our collective intelligence.
Yes, I agree that it’s a shame that landlords can no longer boot people out of their home on a whim or because they want to put the rent up enormously. But the truth is that the problem is made worse in Brighton by the vast amount of housing/space for housing which has been turned over to students in such a small town. Even now with student numbers falling there are two applications in the pipeline to erect two more student tower blocks; one on Hollingdean Lane and the other n Moulsecoomb Way – space that should be utilised to build social housing.
It’s a really good point, I don’t know why we are seeing developers so keen to build student housing when the current stock is struggling to get filled, according to the local news. The legalisation is but a single piece of a larger puzzle, in my opinion. I feel the opportunity is in the strategic authority; having greater control of the area’s planning and development will enable more building of the right kind, without the current situation of developers having free pass to building whatever they want through appeals.
The thinking of BHCC is evident in the fact that is applied for, and was shortlisted, to join the Home Office’s “asylum seeker” housing scheme, under which it would both renovate existing social housing stock, or purchase new properties, for the accommodatiom of illegal migrants go this country.
I think that shows where its priorities lay!
Exactly. Council Leader Sankey does not care about her own legitimate tax-paying residents. They are last on her list. You can bet she wouldn’t welcome undocumented illegals living under her own roof with her and her family though.
Interesting you use the pejorative “illegals” here Trace. Dehumanising immigrants is a key rhetorical tenet amongst the far right and their racist fellow travellers.
Don’t just take my word for it – Laurence Rees’ book is recommended.
Anyway, this article considers our local authority’s struggle to provide comfortable and safe housing which, I hope you’ll agree, is a basic human right.
Maybe, like many, you’re a few pay cheques away from needing such a provision.
Whataboutism is a dumb argument, Tracy. Although, there are benefits to having such a scheme, as it’s an additional source of income which is run by the Home Office. Plus, we have to be careful about conflating illegal migrants – who are not part of this scheme – with asylum seekers, lest we fall down the manipulative narrative by the extreme far right.
I will stay sleeping on the street for the rest of my life.
Get students out of HMOs, once student flats are filled then maybe reconsider, but then more student flats are already on the way, housing can go back to being homes and
not HMOs. Empty student flats should be available for others whilst student numbers are down, HMOs have skewed the housing availability to the point where houses/homes are not on the market, sidelined to HMOs. Yes I know the student flats are different to standard housing, but then the Empties ???