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

Charnwood Borough Council (202222678)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202222678

Charnwood Borough Council

18 November 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 the landlord’s response to the resident’s requests for the property’s repair records.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder and bought the lease in December 2015. The landlord is a local council. The property is a 2-bedroom flat. The resident sub-lets the property.
  2. The landlord sent the resident the estimate of annual service charges. After the resident received this, on 6 February 2022 she emailed the landlord asking for the insurance policy document. She told the landlord she did not want to pay charges for what she said was ‘unspecified costs’.
  3. The landlord responded to the resident on 7 February 2022. The landlord said it was still sending out estimates and when completed, it would deal with queries. The insurance charge was for buildings insurance for the property and that the estimate was not actual costs but what it estimated the costs would be for that year. It told the resident the lease stated it would charge this in advance. The certified summary would be sent in September 2023 and would detail the actual charges for 2022-23. It asked the resident to provide more detail on what further information she required.
  4. On 3 March 2022 the resident complained to the landlord that no evidence of charges for repairs had been provided to her. She also said she could see no evidence that any work had been undertaken at the property. The landlord provided a response on 14 March 2022 and said that its Section 20 letters may have been complex because it had to adhere to guidelines and not breach any laws.
  5. On 13 April 2022 the landlord provided the resident the property’s repair records. It asked the resident to contact its teams if she had any queries. It also said although it was bound by law to follow content for its Section 20 consultation notifications, it was revising the suite of letters it used, and would attempt to use plain English.
  6. On 15 August 2022 the landlord sent the resident its certified summary for 2021–22, outlining the charges.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied, and told the landlord on 20 October 2022 there was no proof that works to the property had been completed. On 17 November 2022 she added she required proof of works being carried out at the property, such as photographic evidence. She said she was unable to identify any work done and the list of works provided previously did not constitute ‘reasonable proof’.
  8. The landlord provided its final response to the resident on 6 December 2022. The landlord included 3 more repair jobs in its response and told the resident there were no further records available to provide in relation to the repairs undertaken. It said it could not provide the level of detail the resident was looking for, but repairs that required certification would have a full history kept.
  9. The resident contacted this Service on 20 December 2022 asking us to investigate her concerns. She told us that she was charged for repairs to the property and the landlord had not provided evidence that these occurred.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Paragraph 42.d. of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase.
  2. As such, this Service cannot consider elements of the resident’s complaint which relate to the level, reasonableness, or liability to pay rent or service charges. These complaints are within the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT). The resident may seek independent advice if she wishes to pursue this aspect of her complaint. Instead, this report will focus on the landlord’s communication around the service charges and whether it correctly followed its obligations.

The resident’s requests for the property’s repair records

  1. Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 says residents have the right to request certain information about service charges. Residents may inspect accounts, receipts, and any other documents that are relevant to the service charge.
  2. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on leasehold, shared ownership and new builds: complexity and complaint handling, published in 2020 sets out recommendations to landlords in relation to service charges. It states information on service provision and charges should be made available to residents upon request. Landlords should provide clear information to residents on how to raise concerns if they are not happy with the level of service provided.
  3. The resident put the landlord on notice she was requesting repairs records on 3 March 2023, as she was dissatisfied about paying charges when she felt repairs were not being undertaken. Under the parameters of Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord had until 3 April 2023 to provide receipts or documents relevant to the service charge. It did not provide its repairs log until 13 April 2023, which inappropriately exceeded the 1-month timescales expected in Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  4. By 17 November 2022 the resident had specified to the landlord that the detail provided was not enough, and she wanted further proof of repairs undertaken, including photographic evidence. In the landlord’s final response of 6 December 2022, it did not identify any service failures. It was able to provide 3 further certified reports of repairs which it said included more detail. It also told her it could not provide the level of detail she wanted. It has since told this Service that photographic records of completed works are now routinely completed by it and uploaded to its updated repairs systems, as are surveys, and relevant reports. This was reasonable and demonstrates it had learned from outcomes.
  5. Further, the landlord was aware that the resident did not wish to pay service charges for repairs as she felt they were not being undertaken. This Service acknowledges the landlord’s letter of 15 August 2022 references the FTT. However, throughout its internal complaints process there was no evidence it had communicated or reasonably advised the resident that she may wish to approach the FTT for unjustified charges. It did not suggest she could contact the Leasehold Advisory Service either. This unreasonably contrasts the Ombudsman’s recommendation that it should tell its residents how to raise concerns if they are not happy with the level of service, as it missed the opportunity to do so in its internal complaint’s procedure.
  6. The Ombudsman published an insight report on service charges and the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in December 2023. This Service acknowledges that this complaint exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure in December 2022. However, based on its responses identified above, a recommendation has been made for the landlord to review this insight report. The contents state it is best practice for landlords to conduct regularly scheduled checks to confirm work has been completed among other recommendations. Landlords are also encouraged to make notes and take photographs as evidence of the standards provided.
  7. Ultimately, the evidence shows the landlord had provided estimates of service charges and the actual amount payable for service charges to the resident. It had communicated some actions it was taking to meet its obligations. However, its clear the resident expended time and trouble in pursuing the landlord for supporting documents. Its timeliness to provide supporting documents and its lack of communication regarding the FTT amounts to service failure.
  8. Under this Service’s remedies guidance, consideration is given for detriment caused to a resident by a particular service failure, considering the severity of the situation and the length of time involved as well as other relevant factors. A proportionate amount suggested within the remedies guidance for circumstances where there is service failure is £100, as such orders have been made that take into consideration the detriment to the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s requests for the property’s repair records.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay directly to the resident’s bank account, compensation totalling £100 for the time and trouble expending in pursuing the matter.
  2. Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord is also recommended to review the contents of the Ombudsman’s insight report on service charges and the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction (issue 16), published in December 2023.