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

Haringey London Borough Council (202301223)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202301223

Haringey London Borough Council

5 September 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a management pack.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of a 1-bedroom ground-floor flat. The landlord is the freeholder.
  2. At the time of writing this report, it is unclear whether the resident has since sold the leasehold to the flat.
  3. In September 2021, the resident paid for a management pack. The following month, the landlord advised there were delays issuing the management pack as major works were proposed to the building and estate, which had not yet been approved.
  4. On 8 November 2022, the resident made a formal complaint. She said she was selling the leasehold and had been waiting for a management pack for over a year.
  5. The resident chased the landlord for a response on several occasions. There is reference to a previous complaint being made about the matter, however neither party has provided a copy of the landlord’s complaint response.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 16 December 2022. It apologised for the delay and said the leasehold team would issue the management pack that day.
  7. The landlord emailed the management pack to the resident on 19 December 2022.
  8. The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 4 January 2023. She said although she had now received the management pack, it took 15 months to obtain it.
  9. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 February 2023. It said:
    1. It had investigated the resident’s complaint and identified several issues, including:
      1. Key personnel had left the team and did not appropriately hand over the work.
      2. The departure of the head of leasehold in August 2022.
      3. Administrative oversight.
      4. Teams had to make several assumptions in developing a cost plan for the blocks due to the current stage of the project.
  10. It apologised for the unacceptable delay. It offered £525 compensation comprised of £375 for the delay in sending information and £150 for the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident expressed to this Service that the landlord’s delay in issuing the management pack caused her to lose a prospective buyer and caused financial loss of around £20,000, when considering the potential rental income of the property.
  2. Paragraph 42(f) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure.
  3. The Ombudsman does not determine liability like a court and therefore will not consider liability for the financial loss described by the resident. The resident may wish seek a remedy to this aspect of the complaint through the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer. The resident may want to obtain independent advice if she is considering such action.

 

 

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a management pack

  1. Where a landlord has admitted failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the landlord’s final response put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In investigating this, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord acted in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  2. The landlord informed this Service that once it receives payment for a management pack, it aims to issue it within 10 working days.
  3. Neither party disputes that the landlord took 15 months to issue the pack – significantly outside of its expected timeframe. This delay was unreasonable and inappropriate.
  4. Evidence shows the resident contacted the landlord on numerous occasions to chase the management pack. There is little evidence that the landlord gave the resident’s concern the appropriate attention in the circumstances. It is clear the resident spent more than a reasonable amount of time chasing for updates and trying to move matters forward so she could sell the leasehold. The Ombudsman determines that the communication failings exacerbated the situation and worsened the impact on the resident.
  5. Records show the resident told the landlord that she was struggling financially. In the circumstances, the landlord acted appropriately by referring her to its senior accounts officer to complete a financial assessment. Additionally, it signposted her to the Government Debt Respite Scheme and said it would refund the cost of the management pack. While there were delays issuing the pack, the Ombudsman is minded that the landlord acted appropriately in the interim by exploring options to support the resident with the financial hardship she was experiencing.
  6. The landlord offered £375 compensation for the delay issuing the management pack. It calculated this at £25 per month for 15 months. It also awarded £150 for the resident’s time, trouble, distress and inconvenience, calculated at £10 per month. The total compensation awarded was £525.
  7. The Ombudsman finds the compensation offered by the landlord was not proportionate to the circumstances of the case, the cumulative impact on the resident or the length of time the matter was outstanding. Therefore, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to increase its compensation to £825. This sum is in line with our remedies guidance for failures which have had a significant impact on a resident.

 

Determination

  1. Under Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a management pack.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified.
    2. Pay the resident £825 compensation to reflect the delay issuing the management pack and the distress and inconvenience caused as a result. This sum replaces the £525 offered by the landlord.
    3. Refund the resident the cost of the management pack (if it has not yet done so).
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.