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

Sovereign Network Homes (202228752)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202228752

Sovereign Network Homes

28 March 2024


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. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s application, on behalf of her son, for its next generation scheme.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy for the property since March 2004. The property is a second floor 2-bedroom flat. The landlord is the property’s owner. The resident’s son has autism.
  2. In January 2022, the landlord wrote to all residents on its housing transfer list confirming it would no longer be offering direct transfer to residents from 4 April 2022. It also said it would no longer be offering its next generation scheme. The next generation scheme was an internal transfer application for the adult children of current residents experiencing overcrowding. On 17 February 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to complain about her housing situation. She explained that she is overcrowded and would have wanted her son to join the next generation scheme. The landlord responded confirming the scheme was still open and the resident subsequently submitted an application on behalf of her son.
  3. In early January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord for an update on her / her son’s application. On 20 January 2023 the landlord contacted the resident by phone and informed her that it would not be rehousing her son under its next generation scheme. The resident submitted a formal complaint the same day about the landlord’s handling of her application. The landlord responded on 10 February 2023. It said that following receipt of the resident’s application, on 23 March 2022 it had informed her by email that they were no longer accepting applications for the scheme. It said that it had initially accepted the resident’s application in good faith but never promised her son would be housed before the scheme closed.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints procedure on 15 February 2023. The resident said that the landlord never contacted her by email on 23 March 2022. She said that on 24 March 2022 she spoke with the landlord who informed her that her son’s application would be honoured and he would be rehoused under its next generation scheme.
  5. The landlord provided its final response on 20 March 2023. It concluded that regardless of accepting the application or not, it was within its rights to withdraw any offer. It also said that it was unable to review the call of 24 March 2022 as this was not recorded. It followed up with the resident on 24 March 2023 following discussions with the staff member who made the call. It said that they had confirmed agreeing to “honour”, the application as in accept it, however, never promised the resident’s son would be rehoused prior to the closure of the scheme in April 2022.
  6. In bringing her complaint to this Service the resident has said that the landlord agreed to rehouse her son and she would like it to honour this commitment.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. As part of her complaint the resident has raised concerns about specific members of landlord staff being unprofessional. This Service when investigating a complaint about a landlord, will consider the response of the landlord as a whole. We will only comment on the actions of individuals in so far as they are acting on behalf of the landlord. Therefore, if the actions of an individual member of staff give rise to a failure in service, the Ombudsman’s determination and any associated orders and recommendations would be made against the landlord rather than the individual.

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s allocations policy December 2020 states “Reasons for an internal transfer are summarised in the table below … Next Generation – This provision allows the landlord to rehouse the tenant’s son or daughter in order to alleviate the overcrowded status of the main house or where it may release an under occupied property.”
  2. The landlord’s allocations policy April 2022 states “from April 2022 our transfer lists will be removed. We will only offer new internal transfers in the following circumstances … general needs customers looking to downsize … an older person who wishes to move to one of our older persons accommodation schemes.”

Handling of the resident’s application

  1. In January 2022 the landlord wrote to all residents on its housing transfer list confirming it would stop offering transfers direct to residents. It explained it was giving the local authority nomination rights for the majority of its vacant homes as it felt the transfer list was giving false hope to residents. It also said it would no longer be offering its next generation scheme. In response to this the resident contacted the landlord by email on 17 February 2022 to make a complaint. The resident said that she was overcrowded and would have wanted her son to apply for the next generation scheme.
  2. The landlord responded on 21 February 2022 informing the resident that the next generation scheme had not closed yet but was under review. The landlord advised the resident that she could submit an application and “it will be considered but no promises or guarantees can be made”. This was unreasonable given the landlord knew the scheme was closing and it gave the resident false hope her son would be rehoused. The landlord has acknowledged in its stage 2 response that had it delivered a clear message to resident during her initial contact over this matter it would have saved her considerable grief and frustration.
  3. The resident submitted an application with her son for the next generation scheme. This was signed by the resident on 10 March 2022 and is stamped as being received by the landlord on 16 March 2022. On 18 March 2022 the landlord contacted the resident and informed her that the next generation scheme was closed. The resident told the landlord that she had been informed differently.
  4. On 24 March 2022 the landlord contacted the resident by phone. The landlord has said that during this call it confirmed it would “honour” the resident’s application but did not promise to rehouse her son.
  5. The resident has said the landlord told her it would “honour” her application, that her son would be rehoused and she should wait to be contacted. The landlord has confirmed a recording of the call is not available as only calls to / from its call centre are recorded. As such, there is no evidence from the time of the call which would clarify what was said. Given the call was not recorded the landlord should have made a record or note of the call. That it did not is a failure of its record keeping.
  6. In April 2022 the landlord closed its next generation scheme. Given the resident’s application remained outstanding at this time it would have been reasonable to have expected the landlord to inform her of this and that her son would not be rehoused. It did not and this was unreasonable causing detriment to the resident. The resident has said this resulted in her not seeking alterative accommodation for her son as she believed the landlord was going to rehouse him.
  7. In early January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord for an update on her next generation application. On 20 January 2023 the landlord contacted the resident by phone informing her that the scheme had closed and it would not be able to rehouse her son. This was the first time the resident had been informed that her son would not be rehoused and was 9 months after the scheme had closed. This was unreasonable and caused a detriment to the resident, specifically the resident has said she was heartbroken to have wasted the previous 9 months when she could have been looking for alternative accommodation for her son.
  8. The resident submitted a formal complaint the same day which said that she was told her son would be rehoused under the scheme. The landlord provided its final response to the complaint on 20 March 2023. It concluded that applicants can wait between 6-18 months to be rehoused under its next generation scheme and it should not have accepted the resident’s application knowing the scheme would close on 4 April 2022. The landlord confirmed a total of 50 applications were outstanding when the scheme closed and no further lettings were completed. It also offered the resident £150 compensation in recognition of its poor communication.
  9. This Service has carefully considered the resident’s comments that as the landlord told her it would rehouse her son it should honour this. The landlord refutes this and says that no commitment was made. The Ombudsman does not doubt that in the resident’s view a commitment was made. However, without evidence of this we are unable to make a determination on this or order the landlord to rehouse the resident’s son.
  10. The landlord’s apology and offer of compensation went some way to resolving the complaint but didn’t put it fully right. The landlord didn’t fully recognise the distress caused to the resident. It gave the resident false hope her son would be rehoused and failed to inform her of the end of the scheme for 9 months. As such this amounts to service failure and a set of orders are outlined below.

Complaint Handling

  1. On 20 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to submit a formal complaint. The landlord responded to the resident acknowledging her complaint on 24 January 2023 and said a response would be received by 6 February 2023. This was in-line with the landlord’s complaints policy which states it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. However, the landlord did not respond to the resident until 10 February 2023. This was 4 days outside of its agreed timescale and there is no evidence the landlord informed the resident of the delay. This was a failing in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  2. As part of her escalation request the resident raised concerns that inaccurate information had been provided in the landlord’s stage one response. Specifically, the resident has said she was not contacted by email on 23 March 2022 as outlined at stage 1. The landlord has acknowledged this failing as part of its stage 2 response and confirmed that no email was sent on 23 March 2022. This was an appropriate response given the error.
  3. As part of the resident’s complaint to the landlord she has also outlined that she was told during a telephone call with the landlord that making a complaint “wouldn’t make a difference”. The landlord has acknowledged, as part of its final response, that this comment should not have been made. It has accepted that the comment was assumptive and not in line with its complaints process. It has said that a full investigation of the application should have been completed before any determination was made. This was an appropriate response, however, the landlord has not considered any impact its complaints handling may have had on the resident or offered redress. As such, this amounts to service failure and an order is set out below.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s next generation application.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord should take the following actions within the next 4 weeks and provide evidence of compliance to the Ombudsman:
    1. Pay the resident a total of £300 compensation. (If payment of the £150 already offered has been made this can be deducted from the total). This consists of:
      1. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused through its handling of the resident’s application.
      2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused through its handling of the resident’s complaint.
    2. Write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report. In this letter the landlord should signpost the resident to the local authority with information about how to apply to its housing list for her son.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should review the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on knowledge and information management alongside the findings in this case.