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

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG) (202309915)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202309915

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG)

21 March 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 landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Rent and service charge account.
    2. Reports that repairs were needed to the main entrance door.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident was a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. She surrendered her tenancy in September 2023. The property was a ground floor 1-bedroom flat in a retirement housing complex. The resident’s daughter has acted as her representative for the duration of the complaint.
  2. For context, the landlord said it introduced a new system to set up service charge estimates for all properties in 2021/2022 but there were system issues. It said there were further issues in 2022/2023. The landlord provided a document dated 24 February 2023 which set out the resident’s new rent and service charges for 2023/2024. However, there was no evidence the resident received the letter.
  3. On 25 April 2023, the landlord told the resident she needed to increase her standing order from £662 to £905.88 due to rent account arrears. The resident’s daughter complained the following day. She said:
    1. Her mother was upset as she had never previously been in arrears.
    2. Her mother had not received any arrears notification.
    3. Staff had told her mother to continue paying the same amount of rent she paid prior to the increase from 3 April 2023.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 12 May 2023 and upheld the complaint. It said:
    1. It had told the resident:
      1. She needed to increase her standing order to cover the rent increase from 3 April 2023.
      2. There were £497.68 arrears.
    2. It acknowledged the resident got upset. However, it sent an apology letter and arranged for £50 compensation to be paid.
    3. Residents in some of its properties were excluded from the automated arrears system process. To avoid a similar situation, it said residents would now receive arrears letters.
    4. Some residents had not been notified of the charge increases.
    5. It accepted staff had incorrectly advised to continue paying the same rent.

The resident’s daughter replied 3 days later and requested to escalate the complaint. She said her mother had still not received written confirmation of her rent charges which should have received before April 2023.

  1. On 24 May 2023, the landlord sent a correction notice to the resident which said:
    1. There had been an error for charges notified in February 2023.
    2. Her weekly charge had reduced from £209.05 to £193.23 per week.

The landlord sent a second apology letter on 8 June 2023.

  1. The resident’s daughter chased the complaint on 3 July 2023. The landlord responded the same day and said it needed a reason why she was unhappy with the response before it would escalate. It subsequently spoke to the resident’s daughter on 6 and 11 July 2023. In the call on 11 July 2023 the resident’s daughter:
    1. Said staff had been unable to explain the service charges.
    2. Said her mother had incorrectly been told she owed £900.
    3. Raised a new complaint issue that there were repairs outstanding to the main entrance door.
  2. The landlord escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 22 August 2023 and spoke to the resident’s daughter again on 11 September 2023. It issued the stage 2 response on 25 September 2023 where it upheld the complaint. It said:
    1. It acknowledged the conversation of 25 April 2023 had caused distress.
    2. There had been problems preparing service charge estimates which had led to errors on the rent account and service charge information sent to the resident.
    3. Residents normally get a letter once the account went into arrears. In this case, automated letters were paused on the system.
    4. The delay issuing a written stage 2 response was caused by an internal communication breakdown. It acknowledged its service was below the expected standard.
    5. In relation to the main entrance door, it said there were delays repairing the door due to difficulty obtaining parts. However, from 28 July to 1 September 2023 residents had been kept updated. Security was also on site from 5pm to 8am Monday to Friday. And 24 hours a day at the weekend. It had learnt from the complaint and set up weekly meetings with the repairs team and contractor.
    6. It offered £240 compensation made up of:
      1. £30 for errors with service charge estimates and no written arrears letters being sent.
      2. £30 for the poor stage 2 complaint handling.
      3. £30 for the delay responding to the escalated concerns. It said the response should have been sent by 22 September 2023, but it was not sent until 25 September 2023.
      4. £150 for distress caused.

Events after the end of the complaints process

  1. The resident’s rent account closed on 24 September 2023. The resident’s daughter emailed the landlord on 29 September 2023 and said:
    1. She remained unhappy with the amount of compensation.
    2. The rent/service charge issue had gone on for 3 years.
    3. The main entrance door was faulty 3 times in a year.
  2. In March 2025, the resident’s daughter said her mother lived with her.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. This Service encourages residents to raise complaints in a timely manner, normally within 12 months of issues arising. This is so the landlord can consider them whilst they are still ‘live’ and whilst the evidence is available to properly investigate. Therefore, we will consider events from 26 April 2022 onwards (12 months prior to the formal complaint). Therefore, this is taken as the starting point for this investigation. The end date is 25 September 2023 when the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response.

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s rent and service charge account.

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement specifies that rent payments are due weekly in advance on the Monday of each week. This also included a fixed payment towards service charge. The rent is subject to review each year.
  2. The resident handbook says that:
    1. The tenancy agreement will let residents know how much the rent is at the start of the tenancy. “This figure will change as we review your rent yearly.”
    2. Residents must pay the rent each week or month in advance dependent on the terms of the tenancy agreement and they “must make sure your rent account balance is always one week in credit.”
    3. It is a resident’s responsibility to make sure that the rent is paid regularly and on time.
    4. At least once a year, the landlord will send residents a statement of what they have paid. Residents should check these against their own record of payments and raise any questions with the housing officer.
    5. Residents will receive an automatic notification by text when the landlord has not received a payment.
    6. If a resident has rent arrears (missed payments) and cannot pay these straight away, they may be able to arrange to pay the arrears over a period of time.
  3. It was unclear if the landlord increased charges in 2022/2023, but had not told the resident, which led the account to fall into arrears. To clearly show the resident when the arrears began, the landlord could have provided the resident with the statements prior to arrears. However, there was no evidence it did so. There was also no evidence it sent any arrears letters from April 2022. The statements provided to us show the account in arrears on 3 April 2023. However, they do not show the first failed payment which caused the rent account to fall into arrears. However, it is the resident’s responsibility to make sure the rent was paid on time. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to take the opportunity to discuss the arrears on 25 April 2023. However, there were a number of landlord failings which led to the distress caused to the resident on that day which included:
    1. No evidence it had sent the resident a rent statement, which would have enabled her to question the charges and arrears.
    2. No evidence it sent her any arrears notification.
    3. No evidence it had sent the resident’s new rent, service, and other charges for 2023/2024 letter dated 24 February 2023.
    4. Incorrect advice given by staff and a lack of staff understanding around the charges.

The statements showed the resident made a £1,000 payment to the landlord the same day she was made aware of the arrears. This brought the account into credit.

  1. After the distress caused to the resident, it was appropriate that the landlord wrote to the resident. The letter said it “sincerely apologised.” The landlord said this was delivered the same day of the conversation with the resident, which was a prompt response. After the stage 1 response the landlord provided training to staff on how to approach residents in arrears and ensure the resident understood the information given. It then sent a correction notice to the resident which showed a reduction in the weekly service charge and sent a second apology. These were all reasonable steps to take and showed the landlord had taken action to put things right.
  2. The evidence showed there was confusion amongst staff in relation to the charges which contributed to the resident’s distress. However, the landlord offered £150 for the distress caused to the resident to put things right. This was reasonable to put right the distress caused by the incident on 25 April 2023. However, it only offered £30 for errors with service charge estimates and no written arrears letters being sent. The landlord is responsible to notify residents of missed payments, increases to charges, and providing rent statements. There was no evidence it did any of these for a protracted period. It acknowledged some failings and made some attempt to put things right. But the compensation offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. There was therefore service failure. We would have found maladministration had the landlord not already taken steps to put things right. An order for a further £70 compensation is made in addition to the £30 offered.

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports repairs were needed to the communal door.

  1. The landlord said it was reported (unclear by who) that the main entrance door would not close properly on 26 March 2023. A contractor attended 2 days later and repaired the door. This was prompt and in line with policy.
  2. There was no evidence of any further issues until the resident’s daughter said she had concerns about the security due to outstanding repairs needed to the main entrance door during the phone call on 11 July 2023. It was not clear when/if the door had broken again however it was reasonable for the landlord to explain its position during the call. It noted “additional staff had been brought in.”
  3. The landlord said the next report of issues with the main door was on 28 July 2023. The repair was completed on 1 September 2023 due to delays sourcing parts. The landlord said it kept residents updated. It also provided a schedule to show when security had been on site. This was a proactive approach by the landlord to mitigate any security risk while waiting for the door to be repaired. The landlord also demonstrated a positive approach to learning from this complaint point. It set up regular meetings with its repairs team and contractors which was a positive step.
  4. Overall, there was no evidence the resident or her daughter had raised the repair directly with the landlord. The door issue was raised as part of a number of minor issues with the property. The landlord’s response to the concerns was reasonable. There was therefore no maladministration.

Complaint handling

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out requirements for member landlords that will allow them to respond to complaints effectively and fairly. The purpose of the Code is to enable landlords to resolve complaints raised by their residents quickly. Also, to use the data and learning from complaints to drive service improvements.
  2. The Code in use at the time (April 2022) required landlords to respond at stage 1 within 10 working days of the resident’s complaint and to respond at stage 2 within 20 working days of the resident’s escalation request.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 1 within its policy timescale. It demonstrated it had learnt from the complaint which was positive. The stage 1 response also accepted some of the failings and offered compensation which was in line with its policy. However, it did not accept any responsibility for its contribution towards the resident’s lack of knowledge of the arrears.
  4. The resident’s daughter requested a stage 2 response on 15 May 2023. The resident should have had a response by 13 June 2023. However, the stage 2 response was not issued until 25 September 2023, over 4 months after the escalation request. The landlord’s failure to issue a stage 2 response promptly caused the resident’s daughter to contact our service. We acknowledge the landlord apologised and gave reasons for some of the delays. However, the overall delay was unacceptable.
  5. Overall, the landlord used its complaints process to explain its position regarding the handling of the rent account and main entrance door. It took positive steps to resolve the complaint and showed it had learnt from the complaint. It offered £60 for issues with the handling of the resident’s complaint. It has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the full detriment to the resident. The offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. The Ombudsman finds maladministration and an additional £200 should be paid.

Determination

  1. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s rent and service charge account.
  2. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports repairs were needed to the communal door.
  3. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Order

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £572.43 made up of:
      1. £70 for the failings identified in relation to the rent account.
      2. £200 for the failings identified in relation to the complaint handling.
      3. £12.43 refund as the resident’s rent account appeared to close in credit.
      4. £50 offered in the stage 1 complaint response.
      5. £240 offered in the stage 2 complaint response.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should ensure all residents are notified of charge increases and arrears in a timely manner as outlined in its resident handbook.