The impact of joint and several liability for council tax debt on victim-survivors of domestic abuse: A rapid evidence review

Executive Summary

This rapid evidence review supports a requirement in Section 76 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2025 to review the impact that being jointly and severally liable for council tax arrears has on victim-survivors of domestic abuse.

The research questions for this evidence review were:

1. What is known about the experience of victim-survivors of domestic abuse in being jointly and severally liable for public debt and, in particular, council tax debt?

2. What does existing evidence tell us about best practices for debt recovery for victim-survivors of domestic abuse?

Question 1 focused on Scotland only. Question 2 considered existing evidence from across the UK. It focused on best practices for public debt recovery for victim-survivors of domestic abuse.

A period of 12 weeks was available for the completion of this rapid evidence review. A systematic process of search and assessment was followed, involving three broad stages: evidence search; application of inclusion and exclusion criteria for assessing relevance; synthesis of the body of evidence. A total of 34 sources were included in the final review.

What is known about the experience of victim-survivors of domestic abuse in being jointly and severally liable for public debt and, in particular, council tax debt?

The review found only two studies in Scotland which included evidence on both the experience of victim-survivors of domestic abuse and the issue of joint and several liability. Both of these qualitative studies covered the issue of joint and several liability but it was not the primary focus of either study (Treanor, 2023; Glinski, 2026).

The qualitative accounts contained within these studies, together with the quantitative data on the likelihood of having public debt revealed a gendered aspect to the experience of public debt, including council tax debt. The research evidence suggested that women can be disproportionately impacted by the joint and several liability issue of public debt (Treanor, 2023; Glinski, 2026).

The accounts from victim-survivors of domestic abuse in these studies revealed that the joint and several liability feature of council tax, together with the recovery practices of councils led to re-traumatising, degrading and frustrating experiences for survivors (Treanor, 2023; Glinski, 2026).

What does existing evidence tell us about best practices for debt recovery for victim-survivors of domestic abuse?

The UK Government’s Economic Abuse Toolkit V2 (HM Treasury, 2026) was the only source found which focused specifically on best practices for debt recovery for victim-survivors of domestic abuse.

Across a range of sources, the review identified a number of frequent themes relating to best practices for debt recovery of vulnerable groups. These included:

• The importance of co-ordinated, collaborative and whole-system approaches to the recovery of public debt (Aberlour Children’s Charity and the Govan Law Centre, 2024)
• The need for more awareness raising and education on economic abuse and coerced debt for both the public and organisations (Glinski, 2026; Richardson, 2025; The Scottish Parliament, 2025)
• The importance of early identification and intervention in relation to public debt recovery for vulnerable groups (Glinski, 2026; Littlewood and Evans, 2023; The Scottish Parliament, 2025)
• The importance of person-centred debt recovering processes that developing practices alongside those with lived experiences of unmanageable public debt (Glinski, 2026; Littlewood and Evans, 2023; Munro et al. 2023; Bennett-Clemmow et al. 2022).
• Consideration of the write-off of public debt (Griffiths & Cain, 2022; HM Treasury, 2026; Treanor, 2025b)

The review also pointed to the importance of sharing best practices around the recovery of public debt from vulnerable groups.