Greatwell Homes Limited (202319639)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202319639
Greatwell Homes Limited
28 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the residents:
- Concerns regarding appointments.
- Reports of being harassed by the landlord.
Background
- The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association.
- The landlord has noted mental health vulnerabilities for the resident, including psychosis, anxiety, and depression.
- The resident emailed the landlord on 9 May 2023, expressing his dissatisfaction with the short notice regarding a property inspection scheduled for the following day. He clarified that he would be away from the property for 2 weeks and requested that the landlord rearrange the appointment. A new appointment was set for 13 June 2023.
- On 13 June 2023, the resident complained to the landlord after taking a day off work for a scheduled inspection that the landlord did not attend. He expressed feeling harassed by this situation. The resident stated he would be available for a property inspection from 1 September 2023. He emphasised his dissatisfaction with the frequency of property inspections, noted that he had not been notified about the cancellation of his 13 June 2023 appointment, and requested financial compensation for the day off he took.
- The landlord sent a stage 1 response on 26 June 2023. It confirmed that:
- The tenancy agreement stated that the resident must allow access at reasonable times subject to reasonable notice. It would give at least 24 hours’ notice unless in an emergency.
- The records confirmed the last property inspection was in November 2020, and therefore, it did not uphold the complaint that the resident had too many inspections.
- The Housing Officer due to attend on 13 June 2023 left the organisation, and the appointment should have been cancelled. The landlord apologised for the inconvenience and asked for details regarding the loss of salary for the day.
- The landlord confirmed that it took complaints as an opportunity to resolve issues. It did not stop the resident from raising a complaint to address his concerns.
- The resident remained unhappy and escalated his complaint the same day. The evidence does not indicate why the resident was dissatisfied, but he said the landlord made “errors with the purpose to intimidate [the resident].”
- The landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process on 26 July 2023. It reconfirmed its position detailed at stage 1 in relation to the missed appointment and the number of appointments, and said its response was fair. The landlord confirmed that there was no evidence to support the resident’s claim that the landlord was harassing him. It offered £50 for the inconvenience caused because of the missed appointment.
- The resident remained dissatisfied and asked us to investigate the complaint. He asked for £200 as compensation for the missed appointment.
Assessment and findings
Concerns regarding appointments made by the landlord
- Clause 6 of the tenancy agreement permits the landlord access at reasonable times subject to reasonable notice for the purposes of tenancy management and/or to inspect the condition of the home. It adds that it will give at least 24 hours’ notice unless it is an emergency.
- On 9 May 2023, the landlord hand-delivered a letter asking to conduct a property inspection the following day, on 10 May 2023. Although the resident felt this notice was insufficient, the landlord reasonably accommodated his request to postpone. A new appointment was set for 13 June 2023. The landlord’s actions were appropriate.
- The landlord did not attend the scheduled appointment on 13 June 2023, resulting in a complaint from the resident. After a staff member left the organisation, the landlord acknowledged the oversight of not cancelling the property inspection. Recognising the inconvenience this caused the resident; the landlord offered an apology.
- Additionally, in response to the resident’s report of lost wages for the day and for compensation, the landlord confirmed that compensation may be provided upon receipt of the relevant documentation, which was reasonable.
- The landlord’s compensation policy does not explicitly state that compensation will be provided for missed appointments. Nevertheless, the landlord demonstrated a resolution-focused approach by offering £50 for the inconvenience caused to the resident.
- The evidence shows that the landlord attempted to speak to the resident after his escalation request to clarify why he was unhappy with the response. Despite its attempts, it was unable to speak to the resident.
- We understand that the resident was dissatisfied with the offered compensation and requested £200 for the wages lost by taking a day off work. The landlord was entitled to request evidence of any loss of earnings before agreeing to consider increasing the compensation. There is no indication that the resident provided proof of the loss incurred.
- The landlord explained to the resident that since November 2020, it had conducted only one inspection of the resident’s property. The resident did not dispute this. Therefore, the landlord’s assertion that it had not attended an unreasonable number of times was justified. It also noted that the tenancy agreement required the resident to permit reasonable access.
- As such, we have found that the landlord offered reasonable redress to resolve the complaint.
Reports of being harassed by the landlord
- In his complaint, the resident stated that the landlord was harassing him for failing to attend a home visit and deliberately making mistakes to “intimidate” him.
- The landlord confirmed that it did not wish to deter the resident from making complaints and viewed these complaints as a chance to enhance the services provided to its residents. Furthermore, the landlord requested to speak with the resident to clarify what he meant by the harassment report and to give the resident the opportunity to identify incidents of harassment.
- The landlord’s effort to collect evidence for the complaint investigation was sensible. Additionally, it was reasonable for the landlord to request specific details from the resident about the reported behaviour. It is the landlord’s responsibility to perform a comprehensive investigation into such reports and to act according to the evidence gathered.
- There is no evidence that the resident provided evidence to support his claims that he was being harassed by the landlord, despite the landlord offering the resident an opportunity to do so. Therefore, the landlord was not able to investigate the complaint due to a lack of evidence.
- We have found no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of harassment.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord offered reasonable redress in relation to the resident’s concerns regarding appointments.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of being harassed by the landlord.