Crime and Policing Act 2026: What does it mean for you?

The Act emphasises earlier intervention, firmer enforcement, and a growing expectation that agencies will act decisively and collaboratively.

For housing providers in particular, the Act changes their day to day- from the expansion of closure powers to registered providers, to the introduction of Respect Orders and the criminalisation of conduct such as cuckooing, many of the tools that were once primarily in the hands of police and local authorities now sit firmly within the housing space.

More powers mean more options to protect communities, but they also bring greater scrutiny, higher evidential expectations, and a need to get decisions right first time. The courts will expect clear reasoning. Partners will expect consistency. And residents will expect visible results.

This article looks at what the Act does in practice, focusing on the areas most relevant to housing and community safety professionals. It is not intended to be exhaustive. Instead, it draws out the provisions that are likely to make the biggest difference on the ground and highlights the practical and strategic issues that will follow.

The Crime and Policing Act 2026 represents a significant evolution in how anti-social behaviour (ASB), public order, and community safety issues are addressed. Building on existing legislation, particularly the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, the Act introduces a suite of new tools, enhanced powers, and criminal offences designed to strengthen enforcement while prioritising prevention. For professionals operating in the community safety sector, the proposals signal both expanded capability and heightened responsibility.

New Civil Order- Respect Orders

One of the most notable reforms introduced by the Act is the Respect Order.

Respect Orders replace the traditional civil injunction for adults, but sit alongside continued powers for youth and housing injunctions.

These orders apply to individuals aged 18 and over and may be granted by the County Court or High Court on the civil standard of proof, the balance of probabilities.

Respect Orders are designed to be flexible and responsive. They may include both prohibitions and positive requirements, allowing authorities to tailor conditions to address specific behaviours. Crucially, applications may be made without notice in urgent situations. However, a key distinction lies in their enforcement: breach of a Respect Order constitutes a criminal offence, marking a shift toward stronger consequences for non-compliance as compared to the previous civil injunctions.

In practice, the Respect Order is intended to be a stronger, more visible and more effective tool, particularly in cases involving persistent anti-social behaviour. The fact that breach carries criminal liability is likely to enhance its deterrent effect and reinforce its preventative purpose.

Youth and Housing Injunctions: Targeted Interventions

Alongside Respect Orders, the Act preserves and refines existing injunction frameworks for younger individuals and housing-related cases.

Youth Injunctions apply to individuals aged 10 to 17 and must be issued by the youth court. This requirement reflects the need for additional safeguards, ensuring that proceedings remain age-appropriate and proportionate to the circumstances of younger respondents.

Housing Injunctions continue to play a key role in housing management as they have the purpose of preventing the perpetrator from engaging in certain conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance relating to the occupation or management of housing. The Act reinforces a preventative and evidence-based approach to enforcement.

In practice, the above two types of injunctions remain broadly consistent with the current legal framework. What the Act does is sharpen rather than replace them, introducing clearer procedural expectations while maintaining tools that housing providers and local authorities are already familiar with.

Closure Orders: Expanded Access and Faster Action

The Act expands the use and accessibility of closure orders, which remain a critical tool for addressing serious nuisance or disorder linked to specific premises.

Closure orders may be:

Full- excluding all individuals, including the tenant, from entering a property; or

Partial- allowing specified individuals (such as tenants or contractors) access while excluding others.

These orders can remain in force for between three and six months. A significant development under the Act is the extension of these powers to registered housing providers. Although this provision has not yet commenced, once in force it will allow housing associations to issue closure notices and apply for closure orders, powers that were previously limited to local authorities and the police.

While the requirement for senior management sign-off introduces an additional layer of oversight, the overall effect is to enable faster, more decisive action in cases involving serious anti-social behaviour.

From a housing perspective, this is a particularly positive development once commenced. Providers are often closest to the issue and have the clearest understanding of the impact on residents. Having direct access to these powers allows for a more immediate and effective response, rather than relying solely on external agencies to take the lead.

Criminalising “Cuckooing”

The Act introduces a new standalone criminal offence targeting “cuckooing”, a practice in which individuals take control of a vulnerable person’s home for criminal purposes, such as drug, sexual, or weapons offences. This conduct now carries penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment.

Previously, enforcement under cuckooing relied heavily on closure orders, which addressed the premises rather than the perpetrator. This often resulted in disruption to the property without directly tackling the individual responsible for the exploitation.

This reform addresses that gap by enabling the prosecution of those orchestrating cuckooing. It represents a much more focused and effective response, shifting the emphasis away from simply securing the premises and toward holding perpetrators directly accountable.

For practitioners, this is a particularly welcome development. It aligns the legal response more closely with the underlying harm, rather than relying on indirect measures that do not fully resolve the issue.

Enhanced Powers to Address Anti-Social Behaviour

A central theme of the Act is the strengthening of existing ASB powers. Key enhancements include:

• Extending dispersal powers from 48 to 72 hours

• Extending the duration of closure notices from 48 to 72 hours

• Increasing fixed penalty notices for breaches of Public Space Protection Orders and Community Protection Notices to £500

• Allowing vehicle seizure without prior warning

• Creating a new offence of trespass with intent to commit a crime

In addition, local policing bodies will play an enhanced role in ASB case reviews, reflecting a broader shift toward accountability, oversight, and multi-agency responsibility.

Taken together, these changes are less about introducing entirely new concepts and more about strengthening and extending what already exists. For practitioners, the impact is likely to be felt in quicker intervention, longer-lasting measures, and a reduced reliance on repeat applications to manage the same behaviour.

Key Takeaways for Housing Associations

• The Act affords Housing Associations broader powers for tackling ASB with the introduction of Respect Orders and the extension of closure powers.

• When Respect Orders are breached, it will be a criminal offence meaning wider sentencing powers are available to the court, including the ability to impose rehabilitation requirements around drugs and alcohol. This will hopefully address the underlying causes of ASB which the underutilised positive requirements associated with civil injunctions has failed to achieve.

• ‘Prolific breachers’ of Respect Orders will be dealt with in the criminal court meaning Housing Associations will not be incurring legal costs for enforcement as they would ordinarily do with Civil Injunctions.

• Youth and housing injunctions continue, but with increased emphasis on safeguards, and proportionality. If a Housing Association applies for a Housing Injunction, the court can instead make a Respect Order and vice versa.

• A direct criminal offence means perpetrators of Cuckooing can be prosecuted directly in addition to the making of partial or full closure order enabling a more holistic approach.

• Success will depend on detailed case records, clear escalation, and documented decision-making.

• Information sharing and joint working will increase, alongside expectations around data protection and governance.

Conclusion

The Act does provide housing associations with stronger, more flexible tools to tackle and deal with ASB. However, the Act is not simply about having more powers. It reflects a broader expectation that those powers will be used early, proportionately, and with a clear evidential foundation. The emphasis on escalation, partnership working, and accountability means that informal or inconsistent approaches to ASB will become increasingly difficult to justify. For housing providers, the challenge will be to strike the right balance: acting decisively where needed, while maintaining fairness and safeguarding considerations. For those who adapt proficiently will be well placed to make full use of the new framework.

Poor decision making is likely to attract adverse publicity and legal challenges making it as important as ever for you to approach us in the first instance as your trusted legal advisers. We can assist by updating/ preparing policies and procedures, reviewing tenancy agreements, providing legal training and assisting with evidence gathering and case preparation.