350,000 accessible homes could be built by the next General Election if regulations are updated

The Centre for Ageing Better is calling on the UK Government to implement the “eagerly awaited” improvements to building regulations to introduce more accessible housing options as soon as possible.

A couple of weeks ago, housebuilders stated that implementing Part M accessible housing regulations would cost around £310 million a year. Yet, charities and housing experts are warning of the significant current cost of homes with poor accessibility, a sizeable proportion of which is currently paid by the taxpayer.

More than nine in 10 homes currently do not provide the four main features for the lowest level of accessibility – a home that is “visitable”, the Centre for Ageing Better says. Based on current projections, this situation will not improve anytime soon with only one new accessible home planned for every 15 people over 65 by 2030, the charity cautions.

Housing Made for Everyone (HoME) is a coalition of 10 organisations calling for urgent action to tackle the UK’s acute and growing shortage of accessible homes.

As a co-chair of the Housing Made for Everyone (HoME) coalition, experts at the Centre for Ageing Better point to the vast positive social and financial impact of building more accessible homes.

According to Ageing Better experts, impacts will include direct health benefits to the occupants and savings to the NHS from fewer falls and other injuries around the home; reductions in delayed transfers of care from hospitals back to patients’ homes; and reductions in direct care, aftercare, and assistance as people enabled to live independently for longer.

Another benefit includes wellbeing and mental health improvements for residents finally receiving suitable accommodation and reductions in the need for retrofitting adaptations into homes later, which is more costly than making them part of the building’s design, the charity explains.

Holly Holder, Deputy Director for Homes at the Centre for Ageing Better, commented: “Raising the standard of accessibility has the potential to change millions of lives and to cut some of the huge societal costs, particularly from reduced demand on health services, that come when people are forced to live in homes that do not meet their needs because of the lack of any appropriate alternative.”

In terms of savings to the public purse, the introduction of minimum accessibility standards for new homes will help reduce the £323 million cost every year to the NHS and almost £2 billion annual cost to society of falls on stairs and on the level in homes in England, Ageing Better highlights.

The £573 million annual cost of the Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs) to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to make accessibility improvements in people’s homes, and the estimated £2 million annual cost to the NHS of delayed transfer of care because of accessibility issues such as awaiting community equipment and adaptations within the home, could also reduce.

Furthermore, the cost to the public purse of continuing to build homes that do not meet the accessibility standards the government has committed to will only continue to grow as the population ages, Ageing Better points out.

For housebuilders, Ageing Better experts believe a universal raise in accessibility standards does not have to mean extra costs, as all developers will factor in the same additional costs and buy land based on the same assumptions. The change in regulations will simplify the existing system, which varies in requirements from area to area, by providing more certainty and a level playing field for developers.

The government announced in July that it intended to improve building regulations to require all new homes to have entrance-level step-free access and other accessibility features as a minimum requirement. However, a second consultation on the draft technical details is scheduled before the change can be made to building regulations.

If the legislation were changed today, more than 350,000 accessible homes could be built in time for the next General Election, which would go some way to providing options for occupants of the one million households in this country currently lacking the required adaptations, Ageing Better underlines.

Holly continued: “By continuing to build new homes that are not accessible to all, we would effectively be building in more costs in adaptations needed in the future, more cost in terms of NHS and care spending and more carbon costs as homes aren’t fit for purpose in the long term.

“Some of these costs can be quantified but others cannot, meaning the benefits are even greater than we can calculate. And these are real benefits that accrue year-on-year, while the initial costs to tackle this issue are a one-off.

“The existing number of accessible homes in this country is woefully inadequate for current needs, and demand for accessible and adaptable homes will only increase given demographic trends. We are keen for the government to finish the good work they have started here so that the legislation can start making a difference to people’s lives, and society more generally, as soon as possible.”