Research for the government on the effects of its housing benefit reforms confirm that the capital will feel them most

Early estimates of the numbers of London households that would be forced to move home by the government's changes to housing benefit entitlement varied between 9,000 (Greater London Authority) and 82,000 (London Councils), and no reliable measure of their actual effects is likely to emerge for a while yet.

That is because fears about the impact of reduced rates, especially in London, led to existing claimants (as opposed to new ones) being granted a nine-month transitional period from the anniversary of their claim to adjust to the changes. Consequently, those existing claimants did not become subject to the reforms until the start of this calendar year, which has yet to reach its mid-point.

In the meantime, we have an independent summary of early findings of the measures' effects across Britain compiled for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) by academics at Sheffield Hallam and Oxford universities and Ipsos MORI. Unsurprisingly, given our punishingly high private sector rents, these paint a distinctive picture of the situation in London compared with the rest of the country. Equally unsurprisingly, that picture is mostly bleaker than those elsewhere.

Surveys of claimants and landlords undertaken last autumn found that a third of London claimants existing or new, had tried to negotiate a lower rent with their landlords compared with less than a fifth of those living in other parts of the country, but that only 31% had succeeded compared with 49% outside the capital.

The report also says that "nearly four in ten landlords in the three London potential out-flow areas" looked at - Brent, Westminster and Hackney - said they'd already "taken some action (eviction, termination or non-renewal of a tenancy) because of the new measures," compared with just a quarter of those not in London.

London claimants were also more likely to report that landlords were "generally unwilling to let their accommodation to housing benefit claimants, compared to a quarter of claimants living outside London," according to the report - 62% of them, compared with 25% in the rest of the country.

The researchers were surprised to find that a smaller proportion of London claimants said there was a shortfall between the benefit they received and the rent they were paying - 56% compared with 71% - but that economising on both essential and non-essential items in the household budget was common ground. However, London claimants were more likely to say they'd tried to solve the problem by seeking a job or getting a better-paid one than they already had.

I was very struck by one further contrast in a section headed "looking ahead" (page 82):

Claimants living in the London case study areas were less likely than those elsewhere to report that they would look for lower rent properties, whether locally or further afield (18 per cent compared to 24 per cent). The responses of new and existing claimants were broadly the same. This reluctance to move reflected a considerable attachment to their local area as a place to live, as well as its proximity to family and friends. Over half the claimants living in London, compared to three out of ten of those living elsewhere, said they were reluctant to move because they liked where they were currently living.

A big city like London can be a harsh place for families on low incomes, making local support networks and familiar surroundings extra important for coping with life's tribulations. A wise London housing expert told me two years ago that he expected many of those who would be hit by housing benefit reductions to adjust by spending less on food or turning the heating down in order to pay their rents, rather than abandoning the vital comforts of a familiar neighbourhood.

The true impact of HB reform on London will not be measurable only by the numbers of households that pack their bags. It will be much more damaging than that.