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

Orbit Group Limited (202306375)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306375

Orbit Group Limited

28 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
    1. handling of communal grounds maintenance services.
    2. complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord. The tenancy is an affordable rent tenancy. The property is a 3-bedroom bungalow. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. The resident raised a complaint (which will be referred to as complaint A) on 17 October 2022 that her front garden grass had not been cut. She said that this had happened on previous occasions, and that she paid services charges for such maintenance.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 24 October 2022. It stated that the lack of grounds maintenance had been an issue due to a change in contractors.
  4. On 3 April 2023, the resident raised a new complaint (which will be referred to as complaint B) about the landlord’s handling of grounds maintenance at the front of her property. She questioned why she had been taken off the list for garden maintenance despite paying for it in her service charge. The resident requested compensation and for the landlord to cut the grass. The resident contacted us on 22 May 2023 and said that she had not received a complaint response from the landlord.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 response for complaint A on 14 June 2023. It said that her tenancy agreement stated that she was liable for the maintenance and upkeep of her garden, within her boundaries. The landlord sent the resident a boundary map, which it stated showed what her service charge payment went towards.
  6. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 15 June 2023 and said that she did not agree with the landlord’s complaint response and wished to escalate the complaint.
  7. The landlord issued a stage 2 response for complaint A on 30 June 2023. It stated that photographs of the communal areas taken in the last 3 months showed that they had been reasonably maintained. However, it found that subcontractors had missed 4 appointments in the last 4 months. It said that its service charge team would review the history of grounds maintenance and consider applying a credit to the resident’s service charge. The landlord apologised for the delay in providing its complaint response and offered the resident £250 compensation in recognition of this.
  8. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 3 July 2023 and stated that she disagreed with the amount of compensation offered. She said that the landlord had still not told her whether it was going to cut her grass and weed the area. She stated that the issue had caused her stress, as well as time spent waiting on the phone and checking emails.
  9. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response for complaint B on 8 September 2023. It stated the following:
    1. a billing error had been identified as all residents had been contributing to the maintenance of an area surrounding a block of flats.
    2. it would obtain accurate cost breakdowns for grounds maintenance of both the block and the estate.
    3. the resident has an affordable tenancy agreement, and the total charge is capped at 80% of the market rate, and her payments would not be affected by any changes made.
    4. it offered £250 compensation, made up as follows:
      1. £100 for the service failures identified.
      2. £50 for its failure to acknowledge the stage two complaint
      3. £50 for responding to the stage 2 complaint in 24 working days
      4. £50 for not responding to the stage 2 complaint by the date initially instructed by the Ombudsman.
  10. The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman on 8 September 2023. On 12 September 2023, the resident told us that she was unhappy with the landlord’s final response as it had not confirmed whether it would be carrying out the grass cutting services, nor had it stated whether the service charge would be amended.
  11. On 3 July 2024, the landlord told the Ombudsman that the area in question was not part of the communal grounds and formed part of the resident’s boundary to maintain. It stated that its contractors were previously cutting the grass in the area, but this was not through the landlord’s instruction and was not included in the costs passed to residents through the service charge.
  12. In February 2025, the resident told us that the front garden and alleyways were still not being properly maintained by the landlord. She said that, in order to resolve her complaint, the landlord should cut the grass, maintain the area and pay compensation for the stress caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. The resident raised 2 further complaints about grounds maintenance in April and November 2024. The information provided indicates that the landlord did not issue stage 2 responses in relation to either of these complaints. The Ombudsman is not able to consider complaints that are made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaint procedure. This is so that landlords have the opportunity to respond to complaints and resolve issues before the Ombudsman becomes formally involved. As such, this investigation will focus on complaints A and B. The investigation will not assess reports made after the 8 September 2023 stage 2 response however, more recent events may be referred to for context.

The landlord’s handling of communal grounds maintenance services.

  1. The tenancy agreement states the following: “You must keep your garden tidy and hedges trimmed to a reasonable height and take steps to prevent your garden becoming seriously overgrown.” It also states that the landlord is not responsible for maintaining garden areas, unless it relates to a communal garden.
  2. The landlord’s estate services procedure details how communal and common areas will be maintained. This procedure states that the landlord will continuously monitor the quality of its estates and strive to improve services. It states that the services it will deliver includes seasonally aligned grounds maintenance works, including the upkeep of grass, shrubs, borders and boundaries on a twice monthly basis or as appropriate according to growing rates and species.
  3. In its October 2022 stage 1 response, the landlord stated that grounds maintenance issues had occurred due to a change in contractors. It said that its contractor had since attended and carried out the required work. It is unclear whether this related to garden maintenance or a guttering repair that the resident had also reported. The landlord did not state whose responsibility it was to maintain the resident’s front garden.
  4. No evidence has been provided to us to indicate whether the landlord maintained the front garden between October 2022 to April 2023, when the resident raised her second complaint.
  5. In June 2023, the landlord informed the resident that the service charge was a shared cost between the 17 properties on the estate for the communal area. The landlord provided a map of the estate which it said showed that the front garden was for the resident to maintain. The landlord reiterated this in its stage 1 response for complaint A and explained how it calculated the service charge for grounds maintenance. The map of the estate provided by the does not clearly show the boundary of the resident’s property.
  6. On 15 August 2023, the resident stated that the contractor had not cut her front garden grass and left weeds in the passageway opposite her property. The resident said that the landlord was taking money but not providing a service.
  7. In its stage 2 response dated 8 September 2023, the landlord said that it was committed to carrying out maintenance and grass cutting of communal areas, and that the resident was responsible for garden maintenance. It did not comment specifically on whether the front garden was classed as a communal area.
  8. The contractor had cut the grass previously, and so the resident’s expectation was that the landlord would continue to maintain it. When it stopped cutting the grass, the landlord ought to have explained to the resident why there had been a change in the service provided. However, no such explanation was given at the time. The resident continued to raise the same concerns with the landlord and, in November 2024, it informed her that any previous maintenance of front gardens had been carried out in error. The landlord therefore failed to provide clear and timely information to the resident about the change in service. This amounts to a service failure by the landlord regarding its communication with the resident.
  9. As outlined above, the tenancy agreement states that it is the resident’s responsibility to maintain gardens. Front gardens are often the responsibility of residents to maintain. However, the estate map provided by the landlord does not clearly show the boundaries of the resident’s property. The landlord has therefore not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate who has responsibility for the area. The landlord should provide a map which clearly depicts the boundaries.
  10. In its 30 June 2023 complaint response, the landlord found that the communal areas were ‘reasonably tidy’. However, the resident raised further concern about the maintenance of passageways in August 2023, and has continued to raise this issue. The landlord did not provide any information to the resident about its monitoring of grounds maintenance in the 8 September 2023 complaint response. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to explain how it ensures this is carried out to an acceptable standard.
  11. Overall, there were failures by the landlord to provide clear and timely communication with the resident about the responsibilities for garden maintenance and the change in service, as well as to provide details on its monitoring of grounds maintenance. Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider suitable remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
  12. The landlord made efforts to resolve the complaint by offering the resident £100 compensation as the service charge wrongly included maintenance of an area surrounding a block of flats. We have ordered the landlord to pay further compensation to remedy the failings identified in this report. It is clear that the resident has spent a significant amount of time and trouble pursuing this matter, which could have been avoided if the landlord had provided her with accurate information at an earlier stage. The amount ordered is in line with our remedies guidance for when there were delays in resolving matters. We have also made orders for the landlord to provide a map which clearly shows the boundaries of her property and details of how it monitors grounds maintenance.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will record and acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and aim to resolve the complaint at stage 1 in a further 10 working days. The landlord will acknowledge requests for review within 5 working days and provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days. The policy states that if it is unable to respond within 20 working days, it will contact the resident to advise when a response will be provided.
  2. In relation to complaint A, it is unclear when the resident escalated her complaint. However, the landlord issued the stage 2 response approximately 8 months after the stage 1. The landlord offered the resident £250 compensation in recognition of this delay, which was sufficient to remedy such a delay in providing the complaint response.
  3. The resident raised complaint B on 3 April 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 4 April 2023 and issued its stage 1 response on 14 June 2023. This was 37 days in excess of the 10-working day timeframe stipulated in its complaints policy.
  4. We contacted the landlord on behalf of the resident on 7 August 2023 and asked it to respond to the stage 2 complaint by 29 August 2023. The landlord contacted the resident on 4 September 2023 and stated that it needed an extension to respond to her complaint. The landlord issued the stage 2 response on 8 September 2023, which was a further delay.
  5. The landlord acknowledged its stage 2 complaint handling failings and offered the resident £150 compensation. The landlord failed to acknowledge the delay at stage 1. However, we consider that the amount of compensation offered is sufficient to remedy the overall complaint handling failings.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s handling of communal grounds maintenance services.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered redress that was reasonable to resolve the complaint handling failings.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks, the landlord must:
    1. apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
    2. pay the resident a total of £600, made up as follows:
      1. £250 already offered by the landlord in its stage 2 response issued on 30 June 2023, if this has not already been paid.
      2. £250 already offered by the landlord in its stage 2 response issued on 8 September 2023, if this has not already been paid.
      3. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused due to its handling of communal grounds maintenances services.
    3. send the resident and the Ombudsman a map showing the boundaries of the property and confirm whether the front garden forms part of the communal area.
    4. confirm to the resident and the Ombudsman what steps it takes to monitor the grounds maintenance to ensure the communal areas are maintained to an acceptable standard.