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

Nottingham Community Housing Association Limited (202313300)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313300

Nottingham Community Housing Association Limited

9 December 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 concerns about:
    1. The maintenance of communal areas.
    2. Service charges for CCTV, emergency lighting, and communal gardens.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bedroom third floor flat in a medium rise block of flats. He has lived at the property since October 2010.
  2. On 28 April 2023 the resident complained to the landlord about the amount it charged for services. He said the cleaners did not clean the block, the communal lighting did not work, and the CCTV did not benefit him. He wanted the landlord to lower the service charges.
  3. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 2 May 2023. It wrote to the resident seeking an extension to issue its response on 12 May 2023. On the same day it called the resident who said there was an area of external wall that looked untidy. The landlord added this issue to his complaint.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 8 June 2023. It apologised for the delayed response and offered £10 compensation. It partly upheld his complaint. It said:
    1. the CCTV covered the communal areas of the block and was in working order;
    2. the lighting was working on 12 May 2023 and benefited all residents in the block;
    3. it was necessary to maintain the communal gardens and car park;
    4. it cleaned the block regularly, including the internal windows;
    5. it was not cleaning the external door frames so added this to the cleaning schedule;
    6. it found that a sign was missing from the external wall and looked untidy so it would resolve this by the end of June 2023.
  5. The resident sought to escalate his complaint on 12 June 2023. He remained unhappy with the level of service charge. He asked the landlord for support with maximising his income. The landlord acknowledged the request on 14 June 2023.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 4 July 2023. It apologised for the delayed response and offered £20 compensation. It was still removing marks from the external wall and partially upheld this part of his complaint. It did not uphold the complaint about CCTV, communal lighting, or grounds maintenance.
  7. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and escalated his complaint to the Ombudsman on 13 July 2023. The landlord’s records show that it sanded and painted the walls on 14 July 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The Ombudsman will not consider the amount of, or increase to, service charges nor whether the amount the landlord charged is reasonable. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(d) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman can consider the landlord’s communication, including its response to the concerns raised about specific charges and the services provided. In this respect, the Ombudsman will consider whether a landlord has acted fairly given all the circumstances of a case. We will consider whether it has identified and put right service failures and, where appropriate, whether it has learnt from outcomes.

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s managing your estate service standard says that it will clean all shared areas at regular intervals. It will report and arrange for repairs to shared areas as soon as it is aware of them.
  2. The landlord’s property service standard says that it will attend to routine repairs within 28 days.

The maintenance of communal areas

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 states that the landlord is responsible for keeping in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house. In this case, the landlord is responsible for the maintenance of the communal areas.
  2. The resident raised concerns about a missing sign from the block on 12 May 2023. The landlord’s decision to include this within its stage 1 response on 8 June 2023 was fair. It promptly attended to inspect the external walls and identified the works required.
  3. However, the landlord did not keep to the commitments set out in its stage 1 response. It had agreed to clean the external wall and put things right by the end of June 2023. It appropriately apologised for the delay in its stage 2 response on 4 July 2023 and partially upheld this complaint. The landlord’s records show that it resolved the works on 14 July 2023. In total, it took around 19 working days to complete the works, which was within the timescales set out in its property service standard.
  4. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said that it cleaned the block weekly. The landlord has provided a copy of its cleaning schedule to the Ombudsman. This shows that the landlord attended the block most weeks between 6 April and 21 July 2023. There were 2 weeks that the landlord missed, the first on 9 May 2023 and second on 7 June 2023. It is unclear why the landlord did not attend on these weeks. The landlord missed the opportunity to address these issues in its complaint responses.
  5. Overall, there was an offer of reasonable address made by the landlord in its handling of the maintenance of communal areas. Although there were 2 weeks missed on its cleaning rota, the landlord addressed the resident’s substantive issues in its complaint responses. It was fair to include the additional concerns about the missing sign in its stage 1 response. Its apology for the failure to maintain the commitments set out in its stage 1 response and prompt action to conduct maintenance put things right in the circumstances. The landlord set out learning in its stage 1 response by recognising that it was not cleaning parts of the block. It demonstrated its commitment to putting things right by adding the external door frames to future schedules.

Service charges for CCTV, emergency lighting, and communal gardens

  1. The landlord’s records show that it sends a breakdown of its service charges to the resident annually. These show the total charges and any increase each year. Enclosed with this letter, the landlord includes a summary of the tenant’s rights and obligations. This includes guidance that the resident has the right to apply to the first-tier tribunal to determine whether he is liable to pay for services.
  2. Appendix 1 of the tenancy agreement sets out what services the landlord will charge for. This includes grounds maintenance, window cleaning, fire appliances, and other costs.
  3. In its complaint responses on 8 June and 4 July 2023 the landlord appropriately explained the necessity of each service to the resident. It was reasonable not to uphold the complaint in the circumstances. Additionally, it recognised that the resident may have had financial issues and called him on the same day. It appropriately offered help and its records show that it referred him for support with maximising his income on 8 June 2023.
  4. However, the landlord failed to use its complaint handling to effectively resolve the resident’s substantive issues. It should have recognised that the correct route for the dispute over the service charge increase was to the first-tier tribunal. Although it includes details of this appeal process in its annual letter, it missed the opportunity to explain this in its complaint responses.
  5. The Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of service charges for CCTV, emergency lighting, and communal gardens. The landlord showed understanding of the resident’s circumstances. Its offers of financial advice and support were positive. It appropriately explained the reason for each service provided. However, it failed to direct the resident through the correct route for his dispute over the service charge increase. The tribunal decides on the reasonableness of any service charges, and of any subsequent increases in costs in line with “fair” or “market” rates. The landlord should pay the resident an additional £50 compensation for the resident’s time and trouble pursuing this complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was an offer of reasonable address made in respect of the complaint about the resident’s concerns about the maintenance of communal areas.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about service charges for CCTV, emergency lighting, and communal gardens.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Signpost the resident to the First-Tier Tribunal service regarding his dispute over the level and reasonableness of its service charges.
    3. Pay the resident £50 compensation for the time and trouble caused to him by the failing identified in this report
    4. Provide evidence of compliance with the above to the Ombudsman.