Onward Homes Limited (202308587)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202308587
Onward Homes Limited
25 February 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
- The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of her reports:
- It had failed to carry out grounds maintenance.
- Of repairs to external communal lighting.
- This Service has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.
Background
- The resident is a shared owner of a 3-bedroom terraced house. She purchased the property, on a new build development, through a shared ownership scheme on 6 September 2019. She owns 50% share of the property and pays rent and a service charge to the landlord for the other 50%. The landlord is not aware of any resident vulnerabilities.
- The resident submitted a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 14 January 2022. She said that in September 2021 she asked the landlord to investigate why it had not maintained the communal gardens since 2019. She also said that around the same time she had reported the light in the alleyway behind her house was not working.
- Between 26 July 2022 and 28 October 2022 there were several email exchanges between the resident and the landlord about the grounds maintenance and the lighting. The landlord met with the resident at her property to discuss her concerns on 1 November 2022.
- The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 20 December 2022 and responded to it on 9 January 2023. In its response the landlord:
- Upheld the resident’s complaint.
- Acknowledged that it had failed to maintain the landscaped shrubbery beds. Also, said that this was because it was unaware it was responsible for this element of the ground’s maintenance. It apologised for the inconvenience caused.
- Said it had started to maintain the area from October 2022.
- Said it would not reimburse the service charge, as the charge included other elements of maintenance.
- The resident escalated her complaint on 5 May 2023 and repeated this request on 19 May 2023. She asked the landlord to:
- Carry out grounds maintenance.
- Reimburse the Service charge.
- Fix the light in the alleyway.
- The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint on 12 June 2023 and responded to it on 24 July 2023. In its response the landlord:
- Acknowledged and apologised for its delay in responding to the stage 2 complaint and offered the resident £100 as a goodwill gesture.
- Acknowledged and apologised for its failure to maintain the landscaped shrubbery and offered the resident £50 as a goodwill gesture.
- Explained that it had maintained other parts of the communal area.
- Said it would not refund the service charge.
- Said it would maintain the shrubbery as part of its scheduled work.
- Said it would ensure better communication between its teams.
Post internal complaints process.
- The resident told this Service issues about the grounds maintenance continue. She said the landlord has not been maintaining the grounds. She also said she has been in contact with the landlord about this.
Assessment and findings
Scope of the investigation
- As part of the resident’s complaint to the landlord about its failure to carry out grounds maintenance, the resident asked for a service charge refund. We are unable to investigate this aspect of the complaint as it relates to the reasonableness of service charge and is outside of our jurisdiction. This aspect of the resident’s complaint is better suited to the First Tier Property Tribunal to investigate. However, we will consider how the landlord handled the resident’s report that it had failed to carry out ground’s maintenance.
- The resident said that the landlord had failed to carry out grounds maintenance to the landscaped shrubbery areas since 2019. At the time the resident complained to the landlord in January 2022 our Scheme stated that residents should raise a complaint with a landlord within 6 months of the issue first occurring. We have not seen any evidence that the resident raised her concerns before January 2022 therefore our investigation will focus on the events from this date.
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s report it had failed to carry out grounds maintenance.
- The landlord has not disputed that it failed to carry out the necessary grounds maintenance work. Therefore in determining this complaint we must consider how the landlord responded when the resident reported her concerns.
- In reaching a decision about the resident’s complaint we consider whether the landlord has kept to the law, followed proper procedure and good practice, and acted in a reasonable way. Our dispute principles are:
- Be fair.
- Put things right.
- Learn from outcomes.
- Section 11.6.1 of the transfer of part of registered titles sets out the transferor’s (the landlord’s) obligations. It states that the transferor is obliged “to keep the communal area and communal garden in good repair and to clean, renew, maintain, replace, repair, and cultivate as appropriate in accordance with the principles of good estate management the communal area and communal garden.”
- Additionally, section 11.1 of the same document lists the areas included as part of the communal facilities which are also highlighted on the map accompanying the document. The shrub beds are included on the map as part of the communal facilities.
- The landlord’s grounds maintenance specification sets out that the landlord should carry out at least 25 visits to every site each year to carry out maintenance works. The works include but are not limited to:
- Chemical or manual weed control to shrubs flower beds, planted areas, and hard surfaces, as required.
- Prune to reduce height, and any encroachment growth on shrubs and hedges from footpaths, windows, and doorways.
- On 17 January 2022 the landlord said it would pass the resident’s email to its shared ownership team. However, we have not seen any evidence that this happened at that time. This was not appropriate.
- There were several email exchanges between the landlord and the resident between 26 July 2022 and 7 September 2022 and then again between 26 September 2022 and 28 October 2022. In her emails the resident repeated her concerns about the landlord’s failure to carry out the maintenance to the communal landscaped shrubbery.
- Evidence showed that the landlord had initially misunderstood the area the resident had referred to.
- On 26 September 2022 the landlord told the resident that it had inspected the area and confirmed that it attended twice per month in the summer and once in winter, and that it was happy with the overall appearance of the new build development. It said that it maintained the following areas:
- Strip of grass outside the block of flats including the car park and bin store.
- The shrub beds and paving outside the alleyways, which included picking and spraying weeds in the block paving.
- However, this contradicts an internal email dated 23 December 2022, and the landlord’s stage 1 response in which it acknowledged that it had started to maintain the shrub beds in October 2022.
- The landlord was responsible for the maintenance of the shrub beds as well as other communal areas on the new build development from September 2019. However, because of miscommunication within the organisation it failed to fully fulfil its role.
- The resident raised the issue with the landlord in January 2022. It then took the landlord until October 2022 to start maintaining the shrubs. Having been made aware of its failing, the landlord should have resolved its mistake immediately. Instead it took the landlord 9 months to acknowledge the failing and resolve it. This was not appropriate.
- In its stage 1 response the landlord acknowledged its mistake and apologised for it. Additionally in its stage 2 response it offered the resident £50 as a goodwill gesture for the inconvenience caused. The landlord also said it would ensure better communication between its teams to avoid a similar situation re-occurring. This was appropriate.
- It was appropriate that the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its failings in its complaint responses. It was also appropriate that it made an offer of compensation for the inconvenience caused to the resident. Additionally, the landlord said it had learned from its failing and would ensure better communication between its teams to avoid a similar situation re-occurring. This was appropriate.
- In recent communication with us the landlord said that since its final response it has continued to maintain the shrubs.
- The landlord accepted responsibility and apologised for failing to maintain the landscaped shrubbery. It also made the resident an offer of compensation. Having carefully considered all evidence available; we are satisfied that had the landlord not acknowledged its mistake we would have found a service failure for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report that it had failed to carry out grounds maintenance.
- When there are acknowledged failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether any redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
- The landlord’s compensation policy states that it may offer compensation if it fails to meet its service standards and this causes an inconvenience to the resident. It does not specify the level of compensation it may offer. We have therefore considered our own remedies guidance. We are satisfied that the level of compensation offered by the landlord is proportionate to a service failure finding. Consequently, we are satisfied that the landlord has offered reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s report that it failed to carry out grounds maintenance.
- A finding of reasonable redress is made on the understanding that the landlord pays the £50 compensation to the resident if it has not already done so. And on the understanding that it demonstrates to us and the resident the measures it has put in place to ensure better communication between its teams. As set out in its stage 2 response. Additionally, the landlord must provide to the resident, and to us, a copy of its grounds maintenance visit log showing visits conducted between October 2022 and January 2025.
The landlord’s handling of the resident report of repairs to external communal lighting.
- When the resident submitted her stage 1 complaint, she also told the landlord that the light in the alleyway, at the rear of her house, had not been fixed. She said that this was despite her reporting the issue in September 2021.
- On 26 July 2022 the landlord told the resident that it would investigate the broken light in the alleyway. The resident told the landlord that the light was solar operated. On 7 September 2022 the landlord told the resident that it was not responsible for fixing the light.
- The resident reported the broken light to the landlord again on 24 October and 8 December 2022. On both occasions the landlord told the resident it would raise a job for the light repair.
- The landlord’s repairs log between 15 September 2022 and 22 December 2022 showed that the light repair was logged and cancelled with the landlord a further 4 times. On 22 December 2022 a landlord internal email explained that the landlord did not maintain ‘solar panels’.
- Section 11.6.1 of the transfer of part of registered titles sets out the transferor’s (the landlord’s) obligations. It states that the transferor is obliged “to keep the communal area and communal garden in good repair and to clean, renew, maintain, replace, repair, and cultivate as appropriate in accordance with the principles of good estate management the communal area and communal garden.”
- Additionally, section 11.1 of the same document lists the areas included as part of the communal facilities which are also highlighted on the map accompanying the document. The alleyway at the rear of the resident’s property is included on the map as part of the communal facilities.
- In bringing her complaint to this Service the resident said that the lighting repair was outstanding.
- Evidence provided by the landlord demonstrated that it was responsible for the repairing the light in the alleyway. However, it failed to do so. The resident spent time contacting the landlord on several occasions to request the repair. Additionally, there was no lighting in the alleyway which was an inconvenience to her. The landlord’s failure to carry out its obligations adversely affected the resident, and this was not appropriate.
- An internal landlord email dated 15 May 2024 showed that it had accepted it was responsible for the lighting repair. However, this was in excess of 2 years after the resident raised it as an issue. This was not appropriate.
- Having carefully considered the evidence available we find maladministration of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of repairs to external communal lighting. The time it took the landlord to accept its responsibility for the lighting repair was excessive.
- In considering an appropriate remedy we have referred to the landlord’s compensation policy and our remedies guidance. We order the landlord to pay the resident £200 for her time and trouble and the inconvenience caused by the delay in carrying out the repair to the external light.
- However, we understand that on or around the 20 May 2024 the landlord raised the issue as a repair and also raised a complaint. If the landlord has already offered compensation for the delayed repair, it must pay the higher amount offered.
The landlord’s complaint handling
- The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. According to its complaint resolution policy it will acknowledge complaints with 2 working days. It states it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The policy also states that the landlord will tell the resident if it needs more time to respond to a complaint.
- Evidence showed that the resident asked the landlord for an update on her complaint on at least 3 occasions between the date she submitted it and 20 December 2022, which was the date the landlord acknowledged it.
- The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 14 January 2022. Despite the landlord telling the resident it had passed her complaint to the appropriate team, the landlord failed to acknowledge the complaint until 20 December 2022. This was more than 11 months after the resident submitted the complaint. This was not appropriate. The landlord’s delay in responding to the resident’s stage 1 complaint prevented the resident from escalating her complaint sooner than she did.
- Having acknowledged the complaint the landlord responded within 12 working days, on 9 January 2023. This was slightly outside of its published timescale and was therefore not appropriate.
- Evidence showed the resident escalated her complaint on 5 May 2023. The landlord acknowledged the escalated complaint on 12 June 2023. This was 25 working days after she escalated the complaint which exceeded the timescale set out in the landlord’s policy. This was not appropriate.
- In its acknowledgement of the escalated complaint the landlord told the resident to expect a response by 10 July 2023. However it took the landlord until 24 July 2023 to respond. This was 31 working days after it acknowledged the complaint. This exceeded its published timescale and was not appropriate.
- As set out in the Complaint Handling Code (The Code) in use at the time of the resident’s complaint, landlords must address all points raised and provide clear reasons for any decisions.
- The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s complaint about the broken communal light in both stages of its complaint responses. This was not appropriate. The landlord failed to have regard for the Code and failed to appropriately respond to the resident’s complaint.
- In its final response the landlord acknowledged its delay in responding to the resident’s escalated complaint. It apologised for the delay and made an offer of £100 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused. This was appropriate.
- However, the landlord failed to respond to all aspects of the complaint. This caused the resident inconvenience as she had no clear explanation from the landlord about the lighting repair. This was not appropriate.
- Although the landlord has since recognised its mistake and has said that it raised a complaint on behalf of the resident, it is not clear to this Service the outcome of the complaint.
- Regardless of this, the landlord failed to respond to all aspects of the complaint within the published timescales. We therefore find maladministration of the landlord’s complaint handling.
- In considering an offer of compensation we have referred to the landlord’s compensation policy and our remedies guidance. We order the landlord to pay the resident £150 for the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s delayed stage 1 response, and for the inconvenience caused by its failure to fully respond to her complaint at the time it was raised. This is in addition to the £100 it already offered for its delayed stage 2 response.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, we find reasonable redress for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report that it had failed to carry out grounds maintenance.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, we find maladministration for the landlord’s handling of:
- Repairs to external communal lighting.
- The resident’s complaint.
Orders and recommendations
Orders
- Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
- Apologise to the resident for the failings highlighted in this report.
- Comply with its offer to pay the resident £50 for the inconvenience caused by its failure to carry out ground’s maintenance.
- Pay directly to the resident a total of £450, which includes:
- £200 for the inconvenience caused by its delay in carrying out the repair to the external light.
- £250 for the inconvenience and detriment caused to the resident by the landlord’s failure to respond appropriately to the resident’s complaint. (This includes the £100 already offered by the landlord in its stage 2 response).
- The landlord may deduct from this total any compensation it has already paid in relation to this complaint.
- Provide evidence of the above payments to us.
- Provide evidence to the resident and this service of the measures it has put in place to ensure better communication between its teams. As set out in its stage 2 response.
- If it has not already done so, the landlord must respond to the resident’s complaint about the external lighting repair. A copy of the landlord’s response must also be provided to this Service.
- Within 8 weeks of the date of this report carry out complaint handling refresher training for its complaint handling staff.
Recommendation
- In recent communication with us the resident expressed concerns about the standard of the grounds maintenance. We therefore recommend that within 4 weeks of the date of the report the landlord meets with the resident to discuss her concerns.