Regulatory crime and the missing victim: an opportunity for housing to put things right
- R2B Training & Consultancy
- 4 hours ago
- 5 min read
Witness statements in regulatory investigations are still dominated by professional voices. This short piece reflects my personal experience in the regulatory world.
The missing witnesses of fact
In many regulatory case files, the evidential picture is built almost entirely around inspectors, surveyors and other professional and expert witnesses. Their technical and documentary evidence is essential, but they are not the only people with something to say about the offence.
Vulnerable tenants and residents living with hazards affecting their health and safety, occupiers affected by unsafe common parts, businesses suffering financial loss due to fire damage within a building, and neighbours impacted by chronic nuisance are all witnesses of fact in their own right.
Yet in practice their statements are strikingly rare, at least in my experience. Files move forward with schedules, photographs, proffesional and expert witness accounts, but without first hand accounts of what it is like to live in that building, work in that premises, or raise concerns that go unanswered. The story of the system is told; the story of the people living within it often is not.
Justice for victims in regulatory crime
Regulatory offences are still crimes, even though they are often described as not “true crimes” because they lack the moral stigma associated with offences investigated by the police, such as GBH under sections 18 or 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
Exposure to unsafe housing conditions, fire risks, dangerous work equipment or unlawful commercial practices has real human consequences, even when the charge is framed as a failure to comply or a breach of duty.
Victim Personal (Impact) Statements (VPS/VIS) help make the human impact visible; and we should not overlook Business Impact Statements (BIS), which capture the harm experienced by organisations. A VPS allows a victim to explain, in their own words, how a crime has affected them physically, emotionally, psychologically and financially. It is different from an evidential witness statement and is considered by the court when passing sentence. In England and Wales, VPS material is usually recorded on the MG11 Witness Statement form, either within a broader statement or as a stand alone VPS that focuses on impact.
In regulatory investigations, VPS is still the exception in my experience. Very rarely do we see a separate, victim focused MG11 alongside the professional evidence in the bundles. That is not usually fatal to the prosecution, but it does mean harm is under described and the seriousness of the offending is harder to convey, especially where the only reference to impact is a generic “risk to life” paragraph in a professional MG11.
Not every witness is a victim, and victims require support
Not every witness is a victim, and not every victim will be a key witness of fact. Some people may choose not to participate, or may need protection from the stress of formal processes. Others may not be able to give reliable evidence about the legal elements of the offence, even though they are deeply affected by it.
Where there is any indication that a witness is vulnerable or intimidated, an early assessment for special measures should be made and recorded, typically on MG02. MG02 is the Special Measures Assessment form used to alert the Prosecutor that a witness may need help to give their best evidence. That assessment supports applications for measures such as giving evidence from behind a screen, by live link, or with an intermediary, in line with the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and CPS guidance on special measures.
Under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime in England and Wales (the Victims’ Code), people who have suffered harm because of a criminal offence have specific rights, including the right to be offered the opportunity to make a VPS. In regulatory work, that means:
Recording them clearly as victims in case records, not only as “tenant”, “service user” or “complainant”.
Taking a witness statement where they have relevant factual evidence to support the elements of criminal liability.
Asking, in clear and accessible language, whether they wish to make a VPS, and explaining that it is voluntary and considered at sentencing.
Even where a victim cannot or does not wish to give evidence in court, capturing their experience can be central to the public interest decision on enforcement.
Housing and the duty to enforce - now is the time
Post Grenfell, research and campaigning have repeatedly stressed that tenants’ voices must be heard in building safety and housing regulation.
The Renters’ Rights Act 2025 now hard wires a wider enforcement role into statute. Section 107 provides that:
“It is the duty of every local housing authority to enforce the landlord legislation in its area.”
Official enforcement guidance on the new tenancy system repeats this point and explains what it means in practice. That duty sits alongside strengthened investigatory powers to obtain information, enter premises and pursue civil penalties or prosecutions. But the people living with the consequences of non-compliance remain the tenants and residents. If their voices and their VPS are absent from case files, the new regime risks repeating old patterns.
Put bluntly, the duty to enforce is only part of the answer if the victims of non-compliance remain largely invisible in our evidence and in our sentencing bundles.
Takeaways for all regulatory investigators
Within regulatory frameworks, there are some practical steps investigators can build into day-to-day practice.
1. Ask about impact as part of your routine
When taking a statement from someone affected by the offence, ask at the end whether they would like to make a Victim Personal Statement. Before that stage, make sure you have recorded full contact details for all tenants and built early contact with them as part of your investigative planning. Let's remember about the "witness care".
Explain that the VPS is voluntary, separate from the factual evidence, and will be shared with the court at sentencing.
2. Offer a VPS even if there is no evidential statement
A victim can make a VPS whether or not they give an evidential witness statement. The Victims’ Code allows for the VPS to be taken by the police or, where arranged, by a victim support organisation.
This is especially important where a victim is too distressed or fearful to be a live witness but still wants the court to understand the impact of the offence.
3. Use simple prompts about impact
Ask about work and daily life, physical or psychological injury, financial consequences, feeling safe, impact on family, and any ongoing support needs. These themes reflect government VPS guidance and CPS information for victims.
A short checklist in your contemporaneous notebook or case system helps ensure these points are not missed.
4. Build VPS into sentencing preparation
Make sure any VPS taken during the investigation is in the sentencing bundle and clearly signposted in your case summary or report or even prompt the Prosecutor to ensure this is included, so that the court can consider it properly at sentence.
Ensure it is disclosed appropriately to the defence if it is to be relied on in court.
5. Plan early for vulnerability and special measures
As soon as you identify a potentially vulnerable or intimidated victim or witness, complete an MG02 Special Measures Assessment and share it promptly with the Prosecutor.
Early planning can make the difference between a witness participating safely and disengaging entirely.
I appreciate that Investigators cannot fix, and will never fix every structural problem in enforcement. But by routinely identifying victims, offering VPS, and planning for special measures, we can ensure our files reflect not just the breach of a duty or contraventions, but the lives that primary and secondary legislations meant to protect.
Comments