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

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202112113)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202112113

Clarion Housing Association Limited

12 June 2023

 

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 response to the resident’s:
    1. reports of his neighbours leaving personal items in the communal areas.
    2. associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is the leaseholder of the property, and the landlord is the freeholder. The property is a flat within a communal building.
  2. The resident first reported to the landlord that his neighbour was leaving items in the communal area in December 2019.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord on several occasions between January 2020 and July 2021 to inform the landlord that there were still items located in the communal areas.
  4. The resident has stated that he submitted a complaint to the landlord on  3 October 2020. The complaint was in relation to the resident’s neighbours leaving items in the communal areas. The resident did not receive a response from the landlord.
  5. On 2 September 2021, the Ombudsman contacted the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint.
  6. On 19 October 2021, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response. It stated it had identified a service failure in relation to the lack of contact with the resident about the issue regarding items left in the communal area. The landlord offered the resident compensation of £200 to recognise the issues. This included £50 compensation for the delay in resolving the complaint and £150 compensation for the delay in responding to enquiries about the items left in the communal area.
  7. On 15 December 2021, the landlord provided its stage two complaint response. It acknowledged that the issue regarding the items in the communal area was first reported in 2019. It apologised and recognised that there was a lack of communication between its internal departments in relation to managing the situation. The landlord also acknowledged that it should have taken further steps to ensure that the issue was resolved sooner. The landlord also apologised that it did not provide a response to the resident’s complaint which he sent in October 2020. The landlord also offered the resident an increased offer of £400 compensation. The offer included an additional £150 compensation for complaint handling including the landlord not responding to the resident’s initial complaint he submitted in October 2020. It also included a further £50 for the inconvenience of its handling of the situation regarding the items left in the communal area.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted his complaint to the Ombudsman. He stated that his desired outcome was for the landlord to revoke permission from his neighbouring leaseholder to sublet their property. The Ombudsman explained to the resident on 3 February 2022 that we do not have the authority to consider his desired outcome as permission for subletting and the terms of the lease are legal matters which are better suited for a court to decide. However, it was explained the Ombudsman can assess how the landlord looked at the complaint and how it handled the issue raised.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s report of his neighbours leaving personal items in the communal areas.

  1. This report will consider the initial report of items appearing in the communal area in December 2019 up to when the stage two complaint response was issued in December 2021. It will not investigate the recent occurrences of items appearing in the communal area which the resident told the Ombudsman about on 10 May 2023. The Ombudsman recognises that the landlord should be given the chance to respond to new occurrences of items appearing in the communal area. If the resident is unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the recent instances where items have been appearing in the communal area, he can raise a new complaint about this to the landlord. The resident may be able to bring the new complaint to the Ombudsman if he remains dissatisfied once he has received the landlord’s final response to his complaint.
  2. The landlord’s fire safety management policy states it has a zero-tolerance approach to storage and excessive furnishings in the managed common areas of blocks of flats and residential premises. The lease agreement also references that items should not be left in the hallways, staircases, passageways, or any common parts of the building.
  3. The landlord was not able to provide a clear audit trail of all its communications and actions taken in relation to the items left in the communal areas. However, the Ombudsman was still able to determine this complaint using the information made available by the resident. It is key that the landlord keeps clear, accurate and easily accessible records going forward. Therefore, it is recommended that the landlord reviews its record keeping process.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on multiple occasions between December 2019 and July 2021 to inform the landlord that there were items in the communal area. The items were stored in the communal area by a neighbouring resident. The landlord first placed a TORT notice on the items in the communal area in December 2019. The landlord then removed the items on 21 January 2020, but the neighbour reclaimed some of the items.
  5. Items continued to appear in the communal areas, and it is acknowledged that items appeared when Covid-19 restrictions were in place. It is accepted and reasonable that the landlord would not have been conducting visits to inspect the communal areas when the Covid-19 restrictions were in place. However, after the Covid-19 restrictions were lifted, items were still appearing in the communal area and there were delays in the landlord dealing with the items.
  6. The landlord issued another TORT notice on 10 June 2020 for the items left in the communal area. It also sent a letter to all residents informing them of their obligations in relation to keeping the communal areas clear of items. However, after this date, there was minimal action taken in relation to the items in the communal areas, even though the resident continued to update the landlord about the issue. It is acknowledged that a further national lockdown was in place in November 2020 due to the Covid-19 restrictions. But even after these Covid-19 restrictions were lifted, the landlord did not issue an additional TORT notice until June 2021. The landlord also failed to respond to the residents’ emails and keep him updated about its actions.
  7. It is recognised that the landlord’s response to dealing with the items left in the communal area was delayed and unreasonable. The Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to respond much more quickly to the reports of the items in the communal areas and take the necessary action in line with its procedures and the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. However, the landlord did acknowledge the failure in its stage two response and as a result it offered the resident £200 compensation for the delay in responding to the resident’s enquiries about items left in the communal area.
  8. The landlord also stated in its stage two complaint response that when it checked the communal area in September 2021, it did not notice any items in the communal area. The landlord also explained in its response that enforcement action would be its next course of action if the items continued to be left in the communal areas by the neighbour. It also stated that it would conduct regular inspections of the communal areas.
  9. The Ombudsman contacted the landlord to clarify whether it had taken any further action, as stated in its stage two complaint response. The landlord provided copies of its inspection forms, showing that it visited the communal areas in January, April, and October 2022. At the time of the inspections, no items were identified in the communal areas. The Ombudsman would expect and recommend the landlord to carry out the further action it referenced in its stage two complaint response if it identifies that items are still appearing in the communal areas. It would also be appropriate for the landlord to update the resident if further action is carried out.
  10. The Ombudsman believes the £200 compensation offered by the landlord for its delay in responding to the items in communal areas proportionately reflects the failure and amounts to reasonable redress in this case. The compensation offered to the resident is compliant with The Ombudsman’s Remedies guidance (published on our website) which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The Remedies Guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident but there was no permanent impact. As explained above, the Ombudsman notes the resident’s more recent reports of items in communal areas however these incidents are outside the scope of our current investigation.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (The Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that a stage one response should be provided within ten working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage two response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate a complaint.
  2. At the time the landlord issued its stage one and two complaint responses in October 2021 and December 2021, the landlord did not have any complaint response timescales referenced in its complaints policy. However, a recent check of the landlord’s website shows that it has now updated its complaints policy with the complaint response timescales which are in line with The Code.

 

  1. The resident first submitted his complaint to the landlord on 3 October 2020. The landlord did not provide a response to the resident’s initial complaint. Therefore, the resident had to resubmit an additional complaint to the landlord via the Ombudsman on 2 September 2021.
  2. The Ombudsman recognises that the delay could have caused significant inconvenience to the resident, and it would have delayed the resident in progressing the complaint to the Ombudsman because he needed to wait for the landlord’s final response before contacting our service. However, the landlord did acknowledge and apologise in its stage two response for not providing a response to the resident’s initial complaint. It stated that it passed the resident’s email to the housing team instead of raising it as a formal complaint. The landlord acknowledged that there was a slight delay in providing its stage one and two complaint responses. The landlord offered the resident a total of £200 compensation to recognise the inconvenienced caused by the delay.
  3. The compensation offered to the resident is compliant with The Ombudsman’s Remedies guidance referenced above. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the compensation proportionately reflects the impact of the delay on the resident, and it amounts to reasonable redress in this case.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about the landlord’s response to reports of the resident’s neighbours leaving personal items in the communal areas satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about the landlord’s complaints handling satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pay the resident its original offer made in its stage one and two responses of £400 in compensation if it has not already done so. The Ombudsman’s finding that there was reasonable redress by the landlord in this case is based on the understanding that this compensation will be paid.
  1. It is recommended that the landlord conducts a review of its record keeping procedures to ensure that accurate, detailed records are kept in relation to issuing TORT notices. This will ensure information can be provided to the Ombudsman when required for review purposes. 
  2. It is recommended that the landlord conducts the enforcement action it referenced in its stage two complaint response if the items are still appearing in the communal area. It also suggested that the landlord updates the resident if further action is conducted.