Hyde Housing Association Limited (202226196)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226196

Hyde Housing Association Limited

15 August 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:

1. Communication about changes to its housing scheme.
2. Complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

2.             The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 1–bedroom flat and the landlord is a housing association. This Service has not been told of any vulnerabilities for the resident.

Landlord’s obligations

3.             The landlord’s complaints and compensation policy says it aims to respond to a stage 1 complaint within 10 working days and 20 working days for a stage 2 complaint. It says that were it needs more time it will explain this to the resident and give a date for its response, which will not be more than a further 10 working days.

Summary of events

4.             In 2012 the landlord told the resident that she had been registered on its housing scheme and explained what she should do to find a suitable property. Around October 2022 the resident established that the housing scheme had changed and complained that she was not informed of the change for 8 years.

5.             On 27 January 2023 this Service passed the resident’s complaint to the landlord and asked it to respond to the complaint by 10 February 2023.

6.             The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 15 March 2023. It said:

1. It should have done more to ensure its communication around the change in the housing scheme was clear. It said the resident had 2 accounts, one for itself and another for the local authority, and explained how both accounts needed to be active to allow her to bid on all properties available in the borough.
2. It was unable to confirm if or what communication was sent to the resident in the past to explain the change, and as such it upheld her complaint.
3. In terms of its learning, it accepted that it must get quicker at responding to customers and was undertaking a number of actions to do this.
4. It upheld the resident’s complaint and awarded £100 compensation. It said this was made up of £50 for its complaint handling delay and £50 for its poor communication.

7.             On 7 April 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 response, confirmed its position remained unchanged, and referred the resident to its stage 1 response. It also explained that it could not prioritise the resident for a property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

8.             Some of the resident’s concerns seem to be about the local authority’s housing scheme. Paragraph 42(j) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says “the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator, or complaint-handling body”.

9.             It is outside the Ombudsman’s remit to look into complaints about the local authority’s housing scheme, its housing allocations, bidding, banding, and the housing register. This is because these are processes administered by the local authority and fall within the scope of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).

10.        However, as part of this investigation this Service has considered the landlord’s communication surrounding changes to its own housing scheme.

Communication about changes to its housing scheme

11.        The landlord has said it has found it difficult to provide details of information that was shared with the resident about changes to the housing scheme. It has said that this is due to the length of time passed and the team that managed the work no longer exists. It is important to explain that there is no requirement for landlords to keep such information indefinitely and it is not unreasonable for it not to have this information after a significant time has passed (over 8 years in this instance).

12.        For the purposes of this Service’s investigation the lack of evidence has made it difficult to say what the landlord did or did not do at the time of changes to the housing scheme. The landlord’s stage 1 response has accepted this and the landlord acted reasonably in upholding the resident’s complaint in light of its lack of information. The landlord’s approach here was reasonable in the circumstances.

13.        Within the landlord’s stage 1 response it appropriately offered the resident £50 compensation to recognise its poor communication. It also explained the process to the resident and the need to keep 2 accounts open, one with itself and another with the local authority, to allow her to bid on all properties in the borough. When considering the lack of evidence available to it at the time of its investigation of the complaint, the landlord’s approach here was reasonable in the circumstances. The amount of £50 falls within the service failure banding of this Service’s remedies guidance. When considering this along with the circumstances of the complaint, the compensation amount satisfactorily resolves this aspect of the resident’s complaint.

14.        Since the end of the landlord’s internal complaints process, it has proposed a management move to resolve the resident’s issue. Its internal notes from February 2024 say that this was in light of it not being able to respond adequately to the complaint. It is unclear what triggered the landlord to take such action and whether this was a result of this Service’s involvement, especially as its internal complaints process had ended. While the landlord’s attempts to resolve the issue are proactive, the resident has told this Service she has not been informed of this. As such the Ombudsman has made a recommendation for the landlord to contact the resident about this.

Complaint handling

15.        The resident has said she raised her complaint on 30 December 2022 via the landlord’s website. This Service has not seen a copy of this complaint. The landlord was told about the complaint from December 2022 and has not disputed receiving it. Following no formal response, the resident contacted this Service in January 2023. Her complaint was then passed to the landlord and it was asked to respond by 10 February 2023. The landlord failed to meet this timeframe and issued its stage 1 response on 15 March 2023. The landlord exceeded the timeframe set within its policy by almost 3 months and it did not keep the resident updated during this time. This was not appropriate.

16.        The landlord’s complaint handling was not appropriate and it exceeded the timeframe set within its complaints policy for a stage 1 response by 42 working days. The landlord’s complaint handling amounts to a service failure.

17.        Within the landlord’s stage 1 response it appropriately apologised for its delayed formal response and offered the resident £50 compensation. While the amount of £50 falls within the service failure compensation banding of this Service’s remedies guidance, £50 is not considered proportionate in these circumstances. This is due to the length of time taken for the landlord to issue its stage 1 response, the time and trouble caused to the resident in having to involve this Service, its failure to issue a response within the timeframe this Service asked and its additional failure in not keeping the resident updated as per its policy. Given the accumulation of these failings the compensation amount has been increased to the maximum amount of the service failure banding set within this Service’s remedies guidance. 

18.        As such the Ombudsman has made a further order for compensation.

Determination (decision)

19.        In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s communication about changes to its housing scheme.

20.        In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

21.        The Ombudsman orders the landlord to arrange for a manager to apologise to the resident for the failings identified within this report. This should be in writing and within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

22.        The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this report. This is to acknowledge the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its complaint handling delay. This amount includes the £50 it previously offered the resident if it has not paid this already. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears.

Recommendation

23.        The Ombudsman recommends the landlord pays the resident £50 it previously offered for its communication failings, if it has not already paid this.

24.        The Ombudsman recommends the landlord contact the resident about the offer of a management move it discussed in February 2024. It should explain the options available to the resident in writing. If it has changed its position on the management move, it should explain why.