Kris Fuzi introduces new research on the experiences of financial insecurity in the private rental sector.
For millions of people in England, private renting is no longer a secure stepping stone to homeownership. Instead, it has become a long-term reality increasingly defined by rising rents, financial pressure, and uncertainty about the future. New research from CHASM at the University of Birmingham shows how unaffordable housing costs are consuming incomes and limiting opportunities to save. More fundamentally, it reveals how insecure housing, insecure work, and rising living costs combine to trap many renters in a cycle of financial insecurity.
The UK government continues to present the private rented sector (PRS) as a secure and flexible housing option. However, a review by the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee (2026) has highlighted the need for stronger protections for vulnerable tenants. While these proposals are welcome, they do not fully address the immediate financial pressures affecting renters across the income distribution.
CHASM’s research, based on interviews with 50 private tenants across the West Midlands and Greater Manchester, paints a stark picture of these financial pressures observed across tenants’ housing, work, and spending.
When rent consumes the budget
Unaffordable housing was a significant challenge for many participants, with 32 out of 50 spending more than one third of their income on rent costs alone. This exceeds the accepted housing affordability threshold (Affordable Housing Commission, 2019). A sense that rents had risen much faster than incomes compounded this insecurity.
Participants frequently described a monthly cycle of paying rent, covering bills, and purchasing essentials, with little or nothing left over. For families, particularly single parent households, these pressures were especially acute. Parents spoke of carefully calculating every expense while worrying about future rent increases:
"If you look at our overall financial monthly budget, we literally can’t afford to pay anymore [...]. If we are left with £500 a month [after essentials], ... by end of the month that goes. So, literally, we start from the beginning again every month."
When disproportionate levels of income are absorbed by housing, opportunities to save, prepare for emergencies, or invest in the future disappear.
"I manage. I’m quite frugal. [...] Some nights, you know, we might have beans on toast. Some nights, we might have McDonalds. It depends how much months left at the end of the money."
Good conditions or good tenants?
Many tenants reported poor housing conditions such as damp, mould, poor insulation, plumbing issues, and inadequate maintenance. Others described concerns about neglected communal areas and poor personal safety.
Relationships with landlords and letting agents often reinforced these challenges. Some tenants were reluctant to report problems because they feared rent increases, conflict, or even losing their tenancy. Others chose to absorb repair costs themselves rather than risk damaging the relationship.
The consequence is a housing system where security often depends less on tenant rights and more on the ability to appear as a “good tenant.” Therefore, new protections in the form of the Renters’ Rights Act mean very little without effective regulation to rebalance tenant-landlord power dynamics.
The myth of flexibility
A central finding concerns the widespread assumption that private renting offers flexibility. While government policy often promotes renting as an adaptable housing solution, only a minority of participants viewed their situation in this way. These tenants were typically younger, had no children, with relatively higher incomes.
Rather than a stepping stone, renting was often described as a dead end.
For many, moving was not a realistic option. High rents elsewhere, limited savings, childcare responsibilities, and school commitments trapped tenants in their current circumstances. Participants wanted greater stability, security, and control over their housing futures but lacked the financial resource to achieve it.
Housing, work and income
Housing costs alone do not explain financial insecurity. Working conditions were equally important, with 21 of the 50 participants in forms of precarious work, including fixed-term and zero-hour contracts, self-employment, platform work, and jobs with variable hours.
Low incomes and income volatility were recurring themes. Participants struggled not only because earnings were insufficient but because volatility made budgeting difficult. Some people in secure work reported working substantial overtime simply to maintain a sense of financial security.
This highlights how financial security depends not just on having work, but secure, stable, and adequately paid work.
Three financial mindsets
The research categorised tenants into three financial mindsets according to the level of structural disadvantage they faced:
Half of participants fell into a surviving mindset. This was an experience of financial insecurity characterised by unaffordable housing, low or insecure incomes, debt, and little capacity to absorb unexpected costs.
Although still facing disadvantage, those with a securing mindset were more likely to have very modest savings and a manageable use of credit. However, their position remained fragile and vulnerable to rent increases, job loss, or unexpected expenses.
Typically benefiting from affordable housing, secure work, and higher or dual incomes, tenants with a saving mindset were able to build savings, plan ahead, and consider long-term goals such as homeownership.
Collectively, these findings demonstrate how structural conditions matter enormously for individuals to realise and build financial security.
What needs to change?
The research concludes that financial insecurity has become a defining feature of private renting. Housing insecurity, work insecurity, and financial insecurity combine to constrain lives and limit opportunities.
Addressing these challenges requires more than modest reforms. The UK government must:
The evidence suggests that measures such as rent controls, alongside wider reforms to support affordable housing (Worsdale et al, 2026), deserve serious consideration.
Ultimately, however, the challenge extends beyond affordable housing. At stake is whether millions of people in the UK can build stable lives and plan confidently for the future from a secure foundation.
Read the full report: The Experience of Financial Insecurity in the Private Rental Sector
References
Affordable Housing Commission (2019) Defining and Measuring Housing Affordability – an Alternative Approach. London, Affordable Housing Commission.
Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee (2026) Housing Conditions in the Private Rented Sector: Fourth Report of Session 2026-27. London, House of Commons.
Worsdale, R, Elliot, J, Baxter, D, Blower, R (2026) How Tax Reform would make Rent Controls Feasible to Deliver. York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Research Fellow
Kris Fuzi is a Research Fellow and Research Theme Lead (Risk and Financial Wellbeing in Later Life) for the Centre on Household Assets and Savings Management
