Clarion Housing Association Limited (202000007)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202000007

Clarion Housing Association Limited

1 June 2021

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

1.     The complaint is about the landlord’s administration of the resident’s rent and service charge account.

Background and summary of events

2.     The resident is a tenant of the landlord’s property. The property is a two-bedroom, first floor flat on the edge of an estate.                           

Landlord’s policies and procedures

3.     The landlord’s Compensation Policy (section 4.21) states that compensation awards of £50 to £250 may be awarded in instances of service failure resulting in “some impact on the complainant”. “Impact” include “distress and inconvenience, time and trouble and delays in getting matters resolved”.

4.     The landlord’s Complaints Policy states that stage one complaint responses should be issued with 10 working days; and stage two in 20 working days.

Summary of events

5.     On 7 February 2020, a rent and service charge notice – effective 1 April 2020 – was sent to the resident. This detailed an increase in the rent from £445.24 to £457.26; and an increase in the service charge from £5.12 to £5.20 per month. The service charge was broken down as follows:

1. 68p per month administrative fee.
2. 10p for estate refuse collection.
3. £3.70 for grounds maintenance.
4. 72p for tree work.

6.     The resident subsequently contacted the landlord to query the charges that had been detailed on the notice. The landlord responded on 10 March, and advised that the charges made were apportioned on an equal basis to all the properties on the estate, and covered estate refuse collection, grounds maintenance contract and tree works.

7.     The resident subsequently raised a formal complaint as he was unhappy with the response he had received. The Ombudsman has not been provided with a copy of this correspondence; however, it was received by the landlord on 20 April. In response, the landlord initially discussed the resident’s concerns with him over the telephone; and a formal response was subsequently put in writing. Within this, the landlord said:

1. the charges were correct as they related to estate charges rather than to individual properties.
2. the charge covered grounds maintenance and the collection of fly-tipped rubbish, not the refuse collection by the council and the management fee was a standard industry wide 15% for administration.
3. whilst the original tenancy agreement prior to the mutual exchange stated no service charges, point 3.2 stated that the landlord may need to introduce charges.
4. point 4.3 stated that service charges would be reviewed at the same time as a rent review, and follow the same procedure. The landlord had sent correspondence in November 2019 detailing that charges would apply.
5. it acknowledged that the resident would be disappointed with the outcome; and he could request escalation of his complaint if he wished.

8.     In the meantime, the resident had been making enquiries with the Council in relation to the services that it provided close to the estate. He subsequently wrote to the landlord to confirm the areas that were maintained by the Council, and maintained his position that not all of the charges should apply.

9.     On 5 May, the landlord confirmed that the correspondence had been passed to the relevant team; and on 18 May it confirmed that the complaint would be considered at stage two of the landlord’s process.

10. The stage two response to the complaint was issued on 26 May 2020. The landlord summarised the complaint, and confirmed that a review of the complaint had been undertaken. It said:

1. the charges raised to the resident, and others in his block, should not have been made, and accordingly the complaint should have been upheld at stage one.
2. the investigating officer did not check the with the neighbourhood team to verify that the information held by the service charge team was correct. This was due to a staff member assuming that another staff member had checked, but neither had.
3. it apologised for the error; and said that there were lessons to be learnt from the complaint.
4. staff involved had been advised of the cause and effect – as well as more widely as an example, especially when dealing with a complaint.              

11. The landlord awarded a £50 discretionary payment to apologise for the inconvenience that had been caused to the resident. The landlord said that the complaint had enabled it to identify an inaccuracy going back to 2016. It said that as a result, the resident and others in his block would have their rent accounts credited with amounts that should not have been charged. In the resident’s case, a total of £265.87 to cover the period of 6 June 2016 to 31 May 2020 was credited. The landlord also confirmed that no further charges would be applied – unless they were legitimately made in respect of services that his property benefited from.

12. The resident was satisfied with the outcome of his complaint. However, the following year on 10 February 2021, a new rent and service charge notice was sent to the resident. This showed an increase in rent from £457.26 to £459.55 and from nil service charge to £3.40 per month. The service charge was broken down as being 44p per month administrative fee, £1.11 for grounds maintenance and £1.85 for refuse collection.

13. The resident emailed the landlord on 16 February 2021 and pointed out the service charge error. The following day, a letter from the landlord confirmed that the figures detailed in the letter were incorrect. It confirmed that the amounts should have been £459.55 for rent and no service charge. To acknowledge the service failure, a further discretionary payment of £50 was awarded to the resident’s rent account, and a further apology was offered. The landlord also confirmed that measures had now been put in place to ensure a similar error did not happen again.

14. On 18 February 2021, the resident replied and thanked the landlord for the £50 and for rectifying the issue. The resident emailed this service on 18 March 2021, and said he was happy with the steps the landlord had taken in response to his complaint. However, the resident said that he felt the landlord could improve its services and listen to tenants. In a further email to this Service on 29 March 2021, the resident advised that although the complaint was resolved satisfactorily, he was unhappy about the time it had taken to resolve the issue and the inconvenience that was caused to him as a result.

Assessment and findings

15. The resident’s concerns about the issues that had transpired are noted. However, from the evidence that is available, the Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord appropriately acknowledged the failings that had occurred and took steps to put things right. The resident’s comments about the inconvenience that he had been caused in raising and pursuing the complaint are noted. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the complaints process in 2020 was protracted, or that responses were unduly delayed. It is also accepted that residents will be caused some inconvenience as a result of having to raise a complaint. The landlord appropriately acknowledged the inconvenience to the resident; and offered a proportionate sum of compensation in respect of this.

16. It is noted that the same error occurred for the year 2020/2021; and that this would have been of particular concern to the resident given the efforts he had gone to some months earlier to bring the error to the landlord’s attention. However, the landlord acted promptly to issue a correct statement, and recognised that the resident had been further inconvenienced as a result of its error. The landlord appropriately confirmed the action that it had taken, offered the resident an apology and further compensation for the inconvenience that was caused to him.

17. From the evidence that is available, it is not clear why the landlord’s actions in 2020 did not ensure that the resident was sent a correct statement for the following year. Nevertheless, the landlord did advise in February 2021that measures had been introduced to ensure that the same error was not made in the future. No further detail was provided in relation to this, and it would have provided the resident with reassurance if further details about the steps it had taken were disclosed.

Determination (decision)

18. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Scheme, the member has offered redress to the complainant prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Reasons

19. The Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord took proportionate and appropriate action in relation to investigating the concern raised by the resident; and considering them in accordance with its Complaints Policy. 

20. Whilst the Ombudsman agrees that there was a service failure in the issuing of the incorrect rent review letter, the compensation offered by the landlord was appropriate in the circumstances.

Recommendation

21. Within four weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord should write to the resident and the Ombudsman and detail the measures which were introduced to ensure that the resident – and others in a similar position – would be sent accurate rent review letters in the future.