Back to all blogs

Five Questions to Ask Any Rent Analytics Supplier Ahead of Making a Buying Decision

The arrears picture across social housing is not improving. Research published in 2025 found that the average arrears debt per social household had risen 35% since 2019, with total arrears across UK local authorities alone potentially reaching £655 million. At the same time, welfare changes coming into force from April 2026 — including the freezing of Local Housing Allowance rates and reductions to the health element of Universal Credit for new claimants — are likely to create further financial pressure on some of the sector’s most vulnerable tenants.

Against this backdrop, the case for investing in rent arrears management software has never been stronger. But the market for analytics tools in social housing is crowded, and the gap between what suppliers promise in a demonstration and what they actually deliver in practice can be considerable.

The Procurement Act 2023’s emphasis on whole-life value and public benefit means procurement teams now have both the mandate and the obligation to dig deeper before making a buying decision. Here are the five questions that matter most.

1.What Does the Evidence of Impact Actually Look Like and Can You Verify It?

Every supplier in this market will tell you their tool reduces arrears. The question is whether they can prove it.

Headline percentage reductions can be misleading without context. A supplier who works primarily with providers that had unusually high arrears at the point of implementation will naturally show larger improvements than one working with already high-performing organisations. What matters is the methodology behind the numbers — how impact is measured, over what timeframe, and whether the results have been independently validated or are simply based on the supplier’s own reporting.

Ask to speak directly with reference customers in comparable organisations to your own — similar size, similar stock profile, similar levels of Universal Credit penetration. The NHF’s ongoing tracking of the relationship between Universal Credit, welfare changes, and rent arrears makes clear that the external environment varies significantly across different tenant populations. An impact claim that holds in one context does not automatically transfer to another.

2. How Does the Tool Handle the Complexity of Universal Credit?

Universal Credit remains one of the single biggest drivers of arrears complexity in the sector. The five-week wait, managed payment arrangements, Alternative Payment Arrangements, and the ongoing risks created by LHA freezes mean that Universal Credit arrears prediction requires a fundamentally different analytical approach to managing straightforward direct debit or housing benefit accounts.

Ask any prospective supplier how their tool distinguishes between UC-related arrears and arrears driven by other causes. Can it identify tenants whose payment pattern suggests a UC claim is in progress, before arrears become visible in the rent account? Can it flag the structural arrears risk that arises when a tenant’s housing element does not cover their full rent, as distinct from a tenant who simply has not paid?

A tool that treats all arrears cases as equivalent will prioritise the wrong things, direct officer contact at the wrong tenants, and miss the early intervention opportunities that make the biggest difference to long-term outcomes.

3. What Happens After Go-Live and Who Is Responsible for Making the Tool Work?

This is the question that separates genuine partners from licence vendors.

Implementation risk in software procurement is real. A tool that is technically capable but poorly embedded in existing workflows, inadequately understood by income officers, or treated as an add-on rather than a core operational system will consistently underperform against its potential. Research into tenancy sustainment in social housing is clear that effective use of technology depends on integration with frontline practice, not just the quality of the technology itself.

Ask specifically what the supplier’s involvement looks like in the six and twelve months after go-live. Do they provide structured support to embed the tool in your income team’s day-to-day casework processes? Do they monitor usage and flag when adoption has dropped off? Do they review outcomes with you on a regular basis and share learning from how other customers are using the tool?

A supplier who hands over the keys and disappears is not a partner. In a regulatory environment where the RSH’s Value for Money standard requires providers to demonstrate that technology investments are delivering genuine returns, that distinction matters more than ever.

4. How Does the Tool Support Tenant Outcomes, Not Just Income Recovery?

Predictive income analytics that is purely focused on maximising rent collection, without regard for how interventions land for tenants, creates operational and reputational risk. The Housing Ombudsman has been clear that the quality of landlord-tenant communication, including communication about arrears, is a significant factor in complaints outcomes.

Ask any supplier how their tool handles tenant vulnerability. Can it identify accounts where the pattern of payment suggests a household in financial crisis, as distinct from one that has simply missed a payment? Does it allow income officers to record vulnerability flags that affect how and when contact is made? Does it support a differentiated approach to communication — distinguishing between tenants who need a light-touch nudge and those who need a welfare referral?

The best social housing income management tools recognise that rent collection and tenant support are not competing objectives. They are complementary ones. A tenant who receives the right support at the right moment is more likely to sustain their tenancy, less likely to accumulate unmanageable debt, and less likely to generate a complaint. The tool should make that outcome easier to achieve, not harder.

5. Is the Supplier Investing in the Product and Do They Understand Where the Sector Is Heading?

Buying a rent analytics tool is not a one-off transaction. You are entering into a relationship with a supplier whose continued investment in the product will directly affect your ability to operate effectively over the life of the contract.

Ask what the product development roadmap looks like. How has the tool evolved over the past two to three years, and what driven those changes? How does the supplier gather feedback from customers and translate it into product improvements? Are they tracking the external developments — welfare reform, changes to the RSH’s regulatory framework, shifts in Universal Credit policy — that will shape what the tool needs to do in two or three years’ time?

A supplier who is standing still while the operating environment changes is a liability. The organisations that will continue to help providers manage arrears effectively are those who are actively thinking about what data-driven rent collection needs to look like as tenant demographics shift, welfare policy evolves, and the regulatory bar continues to rise.

Making the Decision

Buying rent analytics software is not straightforward, and the right answer will differ depending on the size of your organisation, the composition of your tenant population, and the maturity of your income management practice. But the five questions above provide a framework that cuts through the noise of product demonstrations and sales presentations to get at what actually matters. A tool that can answer all five with evidence, not just assurances, is one worth taking seriously.

At Mobysoft, we are confident in our answers to all five. If you would like to put us to the test, get in touch with our team and we will connect you with customers who can tell you what working with us actually looks like.

Mobysoft
Latest posts by Mobysoft (see all)