Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel - find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202010433)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202010433

Clarion Housing Association Limited

16 July 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 resident complains about the landlord’s response to her concerns regarding a rented parking space and associated arrears, and her subsequent formal complaint about the matter.

Background

  1. The landlord’s ‘Current Arrears Policy’ (March 2018) states ‘it is not good customer care to allow customers to get into debt…if any payments due are not made or an agreement not kept, prompt recovery action will be taken…’ It goes on to say that customers owing any monies would not be allowed to rent or continue renting garages, parking spaces or sheds.
  2. The landlord’s ‘Garages, Parking and Sheds Policy’ (March 2019) sets out that rent is due and must be paid in advance. It will attempt to contact those who fall into arrears and fail to make payments. Following this, if no contact or payment is made a Notice to Quit will be issued, advising that it would terminate the rental agreement. It lists reasons for ending the license agreement, which include ‘the licensee…is in arrears for the garage, shed, pram store or car parking space.’ The Ombudsman notes that this section variously refers to garages, sheds, pram store, and car space, but it is assumed that all terms apply to parking spaces.
  3. The landlord’s Arrears Customer Accounts Management document (May 2019) states ‘There are times when an existing customer will have paid their Garage, Parking Space or Shed rent in full but have fallen into rent arrears with their main property account. Clarion’s policy and procedure for this is to repossess the garage, parking space or shed.’

Summary of events

  1. The resident contacted the landlord on 23 April 2018 to advise that she had become unemployed. The details of this telephone conversation are somewhat disputed, with the resident reporting that the landlord told her during this call that the parking space would be taken off her automatically due to rent arrears, but the landlord having no record of this specifically having been said.
  2. On 13 August 2019 during a telephone conversation with the landlord about her rent account, the landlord referenced an ongoing charge for a parking space. The resident advised that she did not have a parking space anymore and thought that the landlord had ‘taken this off her’ in 2018. The resident confirmed that she did not require the parking space, and the landlord took steps to terminate the rental agreement, sending the resident the relevant forms to fill in to confirm this. The Ombudsman understands that the resident raised concerns about the matter over the following months.
  3. On 3 September 2020 the resident’s MP contacted the landlord on her behalf, noting that they had recently been in touch about the matter of the parking space, and had been informed that the landlord had no record of the parking space being terminated after the 23 April 2018 telephone call. The resident was unhappy with this response and said that another neighbour had been renting the parking space in April 2019. The MP asked that the matter be considered via the formal complaint process, specifically addressing the issue of the neighbour renting the space.
  4. The landlord contacted the resident to discuss the complaint on 17 September 2020. The resident explained that she was told during the April 2018 call that she would not be allowed a parking space as she was in arrears. She cancelled her parking space payments in light of this, as she thought this would ‘be the best way’. She said that she used to have two different accounts for the parking space rent and for the property rent, but these were merged without the landlord contacting her to make her aware of this.
  5. The landlord provided a stage one response on 9 October 2020. In this it apologised for the delay and set out that the resident had stated that she was told in April 2018 that her parking space would be removed due to the arrears on her account. She complained that this had not been done, and she had subsequently incurred arrears, which she would like to be removed.
  6. The landlord explained that it had located the telephone note from the call on 23 April 2018, which noted that the resident was advised that if her account went into arears, this would affect her parking space. The landlord had been unable to locate any notes about the parking space being terminated and as such the resident would have to pay the outstanding arrears.
  7. The resident was dissatisfied with this response and escalated the matter to the next stage of the complaint process on 23 October 2020, via her MP. The resident explained that she was advised in 2018 that her parking space would be automatically removed once she was in arears. She also explained that around the same time, she had two different accounts, one for parking and the other for property rent. However, the landlord combined these two accounts without notifying her, which meant that she did not realise that she was still being charged for the parking space.
  8. On 2 December 2020 the landlord provided a review stage response, in which it noted that the telephone call recording from April 2018 was no longer available to review, as it only kept recordings for a total of 12 weeks before they were deleted. However, the written note of the conversation showed that on 23 April 2018, the resident informed the landlord of her situation, and had been advised that if her account went into arrears, this would affect the parking space. There were no records that the resident asked that the parking space be terminated until 13 August 2019. The resident had referenced another neighbour was renting the parking space in April 2019, however the landlord could confirm that this was not the case.
  9. The landlord explained that the overall balance it provided to customers included the total debt of their tenancy, which may include items such as parking spaces. In this case, the cost of the parking space was added to the gross charges associated with the resident’s account.
  10. Although the landlord had not identified a service failure in its handling of the termination of the parking space, the review had found failings in communication, for example an email dated 12 February 2020 disputing the parking bay charges was not responded to, and there was a delay in providing a formal response at stage one of the complaint process. The landlord apologised for this and offered £100 compensation.

Assessment and findings

  1. The role of the Ombudsman is to assess whether the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns, and to decide whether its actions were fair and reasonable, taking all of the circumstances of the case into account, based on the evidence available and in reference to any relevant policy and procedure.
  2. The landlord has provided a copy of its note from the 23 April 2018 telephone call with the resident, which reads, ‘Tenant informed us she has lost her job & will apply for HB today. Tenant has a parking space as well, advised if the account goes into arrears, this will affect her parking space as well. Will keep us informed.’ The landlord reviewed this call as part of its investigation into the complaint and concluded that there was no record of the resident terminating the parking space at that time. However, the resident did not state that she terminated the parking space, but that she was told that this would happen automatically should she fall into arrears. While it is not possible for the Ombudsman to know exactly what was said during the call, the fact that the telephone note states that the resident was informed that if she fell into arrears this would ‘affect her parking space’ does somewhat support the resident’s account that she was told the parking space would be ‘taken off her’. This is further supported by the fact that this is what should have happened, in line with the Current Arrears Policy that was in place at the time, which states that those in arrears would not be allowed to keep any parking space.
  3. In addition, both the Garages, Parking and Sheds policy and the Arrears Customer Accounts Management document also set out that parking spaces would be repossessed in the event of arrears on a resident’s account. The Ombudsman notes that these specific policies were not in place until early 2019, and has asked the landlord for any versions that were in place in April 2018. The landlord has not been able to provide any but has not stated whether this is because none existed at that time, or because it has been unable to locate them.
  4. The Ombudsman has obtained a copy of the resident’s statements (titled ‘Agreement statement’.) This shows that the last direct debit payment from the resident to the parking space account was on 1 March 2018. It also shows that the charge of £5.11 continued to be debited each week for the parking space, and that due to this the account was in arrears as of April 2018. The statement also shows that the resident had significant arrears on her rent account from May 2018 onwards.

In light of this, and in line with the Current Arrears Policy that was in place in April 2018, the landlord should have taken possession of the parking space (as the resident believed that it would do). In addition, both the Garages, Parking and Shed’s policy and the Arrears Customer Accounts Management document also set out that this is what should have happened, although as above, it is not clear if these policies or versions of them were in place in April 2018. However, they were in place in early 2019, and there is no evidence that they were followed at that time. There is no indication that the landlord made contact with the resident at any time about the matter or otherwise took any action in relation to the parking space. Instead, it continued to charge the resident for the parking space for many months, despite her accounts being in arrears for this period.

  1. The Ombudsman must also take into account the resident’s own actions or inaction when assessing such matters. In this case, it would have been prudent for the resident to check that the parking space had in fact been ‘taken back’ following on from the April 2018 conversation, but there is no indication that she did so.
  2. The resident states that she was unaware that the parking charge was still being debited as her parking and property accounts were merged without her being informed of this. The Ombudsman has asked the landlord for further clarification on this matter, and it has confirmed that this did happen, and that it is not aware of any information being sent to residents about the merge. It is therefore understandable that the resident was not aware that this had occurred.
  3. Looking at the account statements, this Service can see that the one showing the accounts from October 2017 to November 2018 begins with the first two pages detailing the parking space rent, and clearly shows this in arrears from April 2018 and the parking charge continuing to be debited (the following pages detail the property rent). Therefore, the resident could reasonably have been expected to be aware that the parking charge was ongoing, and that the account was in arrears.
  4. The subsequent rent statements do not set out the parking charge separately, but combine them into one statement. However, these clearly state, ‘parking space’ ‘rent’ and detail the amount being debited each week (£5.11). While it may be the case that the resident was not aware that the statements had been combined, they still clearly set out an amount being charged for a parking space. In light of this, the Ombudsman finds that the resident could reasonably have been expected to be aware that this was ongoing.
  5. This Service concludes that both the failure of the landlord to follow its policy, and the inaction on the part of the resident in relation to the charges shown on her statements, had an impact on the outcome in this case.
  6. Finally, looking at how the landlord responded to the complaint, the initial response addressed whether the resident had terminated the parking space herself in April 2018. However, the resident had not claimed to have done so: Her complaint was that she had been told that the parking space would be automatically ‘taken off her’ when she fell into arrears. Further, it is clear from the evidence available that the resident raised concerns at stage one of the complaint process about a neighbour renting the space, and the two rent accounts being merged. Neither of these issues were addressed in the stage one response.
  7. In her escalation request the resident again stated that she was advised in 2018 that her parking space would be automatically removed once she was in arrears. However, the review stage response, like the stage one, did not address this and again stated that there was no record of the resident terminating her parking space before August 2019.
  8. The Ombudsman finds that there was a failing to address the complaint that the resident had raised. It is particularly concerning that neither response identified the failure to follow the landlord’s own policy in relation to removing the parking space in light of the arrears.
  9. The complaint policy in place at the time did not set out any timescales for response, but at well over a month the Ombudsman considers the landlord took too long to provide these at both stage one and review stage. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord did recognise delays (as well as some other communication failures) in its review stage response.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, this Service finds that there was service failure in the response to the concerns regarding the parking space and associated arrears, and in the complaint handling.

Reasons

  1. The parking charge was £5.11 per week, and taken from around May 2018 when the resident’s account was in significant arrears, was charged for a period of 15 months to August 2019 when it was cancelled by the resident. This comes to around £350.
  2. Had the landlord followed its policy, this 15 month period should not have occurred. However, it would have been prudent for the resident to have checked the parking space had been ‘taken back’, and her rent accounts clearly show that this had not occurred. Taking all of these circumstances into account, the Ombudsman finds it reasonable for the landlord to refund a portion of the £350 in light of its failings.
  3. There were also failures in complaint handling, including the main issue that the resident raised (the parking space not being automatically removed when she fell into arrears) not being addressed.

 

Orders

  1. Within one month of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £325, as follows:
    1. £175 towards the parking charges she incurred.
    2. £150 for the time, trouble and frustration caused by the failings in complaint handling. 
  2. Any compensation that has already been paid to the resident in relation to this (for example, the £100 offered in the review stage response) can be deducted from this amount.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should consider carrying out a training exercise to ensure that all relevant staff are fully aware of and follow both the Garages, Parking and Sheds policy and the Arrears Customer Accounts Management document.