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

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202339109)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202339109

Clarion Housing Association Limited

16 May 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

  1. The complaint is about the resident’s dissatisfaction with the landlord’s decision to credit a compensation payment to his rent account.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  1. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. After carefully considering all the evidence, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction as per paragraph 42.a of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. He has lived in his 1 bedroom flat since May 2021.
  2. On 28 December 2023 the electricity supply to the resident’s property was lost. He called the landlord’s out of hours team.
  3. The resident subsequently made a formal complaint on 29 December 2023. He said when he called the out of hours number the previous day, he did not receive a call back. The emergency process that the landlord had put in place had failed. The situation caused him “considerable” stress.
  4. On 15 February 2024 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said:
    1. it did not process the resident’s complaint as it should have when it had received it on 29 December 2023. It offered the resident £50 for inconvenience caused.
    2. the telephone number the resident included in his complaint was not its out of hours number. It did not have a record of the resident’s call.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on the same day. He said he had called the correct number, but had made an error when setting it out in his complaint. His call records showed that he called the correct number. He asked the landlord to review his complaint.
  6. On 5 April 2024 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said:
    1. the resident called the correct number for its out of hours team. He was not given adequate support by the team. It should have advised the resident to contact his energy provider in such instances.
    2. his complaint was not handled correctly by its complaint team when he first raised contacted it.
    3. it had fed back to its out of hours team and apologised for its failings.
  7. It offered the resident an additional £300 compensation.
  8. In April 2024 the resident told the Ombudsman that he was satisfied with the landlord’s stage 2 response and its offer of compensation. However, he was dissatisfied that the landlord would offset the compensation against any rent arrears that he may have. He wanted the landlord to pay the compensation directly to him.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 42.a states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
  2. The resident has told us that he is satisfied with the landlord’s stage 2 response and offer of compensation. However, he does not agree that the compensation should be offset against any arrears that he may have. He says this is because the landlord is responsible for the arrears accruing.
  3. The resident’s concerns are noted. However, the matters that the resident has referred to us for investigation have not been investigated by the landlord. The issue of where the compensation was to be paid arose after the completion of the complaints process. As such, the landlord has not yet had the opportunity to consider the resident’s concerns about the compensation being used to pay off arrears.
  4. The resident may wish to raise this directly with the landlord now. Should the resident remain unhappy with the landlord’s decision, he may refer the complaint back to us for consideration. However, it would be prudent for us to explain now that a landlord may be entitled to offset compensation against arrears on a rent account in certain circumstances, and should this be provided for by its compensation policy. Nevertheless, if this is a matter that the resident wishes to pursue with the landlord, then he may do so.
  5. After carefully considering the facts of this case, the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s decision to pay the compensation it offered as resolution to his complaint to his rent account falls outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.