Salix Homes Limited (202301576)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202301576

Salix Homes Limited

25 February 2025

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:
   1. Increases in rent and service charges from 2021 onwards.
   2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of problems with communal services, including security, parking, and cleaning.
   3. The landlord’s communications about relation to planned communal repairs.
   4. The level of consultation and information provided by the landlord concerning a planned cladding and heating system upgrade.
2. The landlord’s complaint handling has also been investigated.

Jurisdiction

3. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

The increases in rent and service charges from 2021 onwards.

4. Paragraph 42.d. of the Scheme states the Ombudsman may not consider complaints that concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase.
5. The resident complained to the landlord about the increase in his rent and associated service charge year on year from 2021 onwards. He said he was shocked a social housing provider would increase rent and service charges. He said the new rent and service charge were taking up a disproportionate amount of his wages. He believed he should have been consulted before any changes could be made. However, in line with paragraph 42.d, the Ombudsman will not investigate such a complaint. If the resident believes his rent is too high he may wish to consider applying to the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). The Tribunal’s contact details are found on their website at www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-property-chamber.

Background

6. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord for a 2-bedroom flat in a block owned by the landlord.
7. The landlord employs contractors for communal cleaning and security. The resident’s building has a private car park. There is evidence of the resident raising complaints about the standard of parking by cars in the car park in 2022.
8. On 20 March 2023, the resident raised a complaint with the landlord. He said since 2020 the security contractor had not completed their job properly but did not clarify this further. He also said the level of cleaning had reduced and the landlord had not checked car park permits. He stated the landlord had completed communal work without notice to residents and asked for details about solar panels on the building.
9. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response of 15 June 2023 explained what services its security and cleaning contractors undertook. However, it acknowledged they had been affected by COVID-19 restrictions. It told him it did not inspect car parks as they were used by both visitors and residents. It confirmed it would be removing the solar panels. Finally, it explained letters had been sent in February and November 2022 giving notice of upcoming work.
10. The resident escalated his complaint on 3 July 2023. He referred to issues involving the security and cleaning contractors (but did not provide specific details), and said the security contractor should be checking car park permits. He did not agree the notice letters were appropriate as they were sent too close to the prospective work dates. He asked if the landlord would replace the solar panels.
11. In its final complaint response on 7 August 2023 the landlord asked the resident to provide details and dates for his concerns about the security and cleaning contractors so it could investigate. It repeated it did not inspect the car parks but would follow up on any reports it received about inconsiderate parking. It acknowledged it did not know when it had sent the works notification letters and apologised if they had been received at short notice. It shared details of upcoming communal works and consultations.
12. The resident raised a further complaint on 23 August 2023 regarding a planning application he had seen on the landlord’s website for installing cladding on his building. The landlord provided a further stage 2 complaint response on 12 September. It reassured the resident the cladding would be compliant with building standard regulations and fire resistant. It said it would discuss this at the consultation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of assessment.

13. The resident raised several new issues after the landlord’s final complaint response of 7 August 2023. This included concerns about damp and mould, further parking complaints and issues with bins and sprinklers. It is uncertain if the landlord has provided a further complaint response to these issues. The resident has the opportunity to raise these as a formal complaint with the landlord if he has not already done so. He can then ask the Ombudsman to investigate should he be dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response.
14. There are time limits for complaints the Ombudsman considers. The resident’s initial complaint to the landlord was in March 2023. He said that the communal security and cleaning contractors had not operated effectively since 2020. Events from 2020 and 2021 are too old to be considered here.  This investigation centres on events leading up to the complaint in 2023. Events preceding this period are for context only.

The landlord’s response to reports of issues with communal services, including security, parking, and cleaning.

15. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response explained to the resident the impact of COVID-19 on its communal services. It said this affected the security patrols and communal cleaning during restrictions between March and June 2020 and January and April 2021. It provided details of the tasks completed by the security company. It also provided statistics of the physical and CCTV patrols they had completed in each year from 2020.
16. The information was an appropriate demonstration that CCTV patrols had remained consistent and physical patrols had increased following restrictions to 2022 and 2023. The landlord also provided a cost breakdown in its stage 2 response at the resident’s request.
17. In its stage 1 response the landlord explained that the cleaning service had fully recommenced on 26 May 2020. It advised safe working arrangements had been put in place since July 2020 up to the date of its complaint response, but there was no current instruction from its head office to reduce this. .
18. Part of the resident’s complaint was that current cleaning standards were not being met. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s concerns and asked for further information which it would investigate. It explained it planned to increase its daily and weekly checks and involve tenants with them, and said it would let the resident know when these started. Its response showed that it took the resident’s concern seriously and that it had a plan to improve the manner in which it ensured the cleaning standards were being maintained. The landlord’s commitment to increased inspections allows the resident to hold it to account if it has not subsequently done what it said it would
19. In his stage 1 complaint the resident said the landlord had not completed parking permit checks since 2017. He reiterated in his escalation that the landlord told him in 2015 that the security contractor would complete the checks.
20. In its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses the landlord confirmed it did not complete permit checks as the car parks were used by residents and visitors. It advised its security contractor was not resourced to check or police the car parks. This was in accordance with its car park management policy, which does not detail any obligation to complete checks.
21. The landlord appropriately confirmed it would address any reports of inconsiderate parking. This was in accordance with it managing complaints under its car park management policy. There is evidence of the landlord writing to all residents after completion of the complaints process. It explained it would take tenancy action if inconsiderate parking was identified.

The landlord’s response to reports of issues with communications in relation to planned communal repairs.

22. The resident stated in his initial complaint communal works had taken place without significant notice to residents. The landlord’s stage 1 response detailed communal work it completed in March and November 2022. It told him it had provided letters in advance of both, to inform of the work taking place.
23. In his complaint escalation the resident said the letter for March works was sent the day before and the November works on the same day of the works. The landlord appropriately addressed this in its stage 2 complaint response. As it could find no evidence when it posted the letters it apologised and amended its findings in its previous response.
24. The landlord confirmed its commitment to improving consultation in future. As part of this, it included further steps it would take. This included improving notices in communal areas and ensuring its teams were extra vigilant to ensure future communication was clear and timely.
25. The resident asked the landlord for details about the solar panels and if it would replace them. The landlord provided details of the power they generated and why it had removed them. It explained it would not replace them and had plans to improve insulation and upgrade heating. As such the landlord appropriately addressed his concerns on the matter and managed his expectations. The landlord also provided details of when it would complete consultations regarding the insulation and heating upgrades. As this was the next communal works planned, its approach met its commitment to improving consultations in future. 

The level of consultation and information provided by the landlord concerning a planned cladding and heating system upgrade.

26. The resident raised his complaint about the landlord’s cladding plans on 13 July 2023. This was before its initial stage 2 complaint response of 7 August. The resident said he had seen a planning application concerning the landlord’s heating and insulation works relating to cladding installation. He complained that the plan was unsafe, and the landlord had completed no pre planning consultation.
27. The landlord responded on 12 September 2023. It appropriately explained any consultation completed at the pre planning stage would not provide all information required by the resident. Instead it advised him it would cover this further in its upcoming consultation it previously informed him about.
28. The landlord appropriately addressed the resident’s safety concerns about the installation of cladding. It reassured him the cladding was of an appropriate standard and it demonstrated fire resistance and compliance with building regulation standards. It took a further step of reassurance in confirming it would fully discuss the cladding at the upcoming consultation.
29. The landlord has since confirmed the resident attended a consultation meeting for the insulation and heating works in October 2023.

Complaint handling

30. When the resident raised his cladding complaint on 13 July 2023, the landlord discussed internally raising this as a new stage 1 complaint. However, it failed to take this approach. Instead, it responded at stage 2 of its complaint response.
31. The landlord’s approach was not in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. As the cladding complaint was new, it should have been addressed separately to the complaint the resident already had, and given a stage 1 response. By not doing so the landlord denied the resident the opportunity to escalate his concerns on the matter, and meant he had no option but to approach the Ombudsman.

Determination

32. In accordance with paragraph 42.d of the Scheme the increases in rent and service charges from 2021 onwards is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
33. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to reports of issues with communal services, including security, parking, and cleaning.
34. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme there was reasonable redress in respect of the landlord’s response to reports of issues with communications in relation to planned communal repairs.
35. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was no maladministration in respect of the level of consultation and information provided by the landlord concerning a planned cladding and heating system upgrade.
36. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

37. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord must pay the resident compensation of £75 for its inappropriate handling of the resident’s 13 July 2023 complaint.