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

Origin Housing Limited (202223894)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202223894

Origin Housing Limited

25 April 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 resident’s reports of not receiving window cleaning services from the landlord via service charges. 

Background

  1. The resident had a shared ownership leasehold until she sold the property in 2025. The landlord is a housing association. The property is a 1-bedroom flat which is located 3-stories above ground in a block.
  2. On 16 October 2022 the resident told the landlord she had not received window cleaning services in over 2 years. She wanted the landlord to review its service charge bill due to the lack of service provided. On 8 November 2022 the landlord told the resident that the service charge she was paying for window cleaning did not include all her windows, but communal windows only.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 17 January 2023 that she pays a service charge towards window cleaning services, but her windows were not being cleaned. She told the landlord her windows were covered in cobwebs and filth. She also said the landlord previously told her she would have to arrange for the cleaning of her windows, as this was not included in the cleaning services it provides.
  4. On 2 February 2023 the landlord sent the resident its stage 1 complaint response. The landlord said it understood how frustrating it was for the resident to be billed for a service she was not receiving. Additionally, the landlord:
    1. Apologised and told the resident it had previously miscommunicated that only communal windows were covered by the service charge.
    2. Confirmed the service charge the resident paid meant that all her windows were to be cleaned twice per year, as were the communal windows.
    3. Said the windows had not been cleaned as there was a delay to safety inspections on high-rise building equipment. It was awaiting safety certificates to enable its window cleaning team to be able to use the equipment and access the windows.
    4. Offered to refund the resident 2 years of window cleaning charges, which was calculated at £121.61 per year, this meant a total of £243.22.
    5. Provided feedback to its teams to ensure errors are not repeated.
  5. The resident chased the landlord for updates on the status of the window cleaning services on 7 occasions between 8 February 2023 and 10 September 2023, this is when she asked that her complaint was escalated.
  6. On 12 October 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord reiterated that it had previously reimbursed all the window cleaning service charges. The landlord told the resident the delays to providing the service was because it was ensuring the equipment it used was safe. A safety inspection was carried out in June 2023, but its team had not shared internally that cleaning could start. It told the resident it would clean the windows on 24 October 2023. It also apologised for its service delivery and the time and trouble the resident had taken in pursuing the matter. It offered £100 in compensation. It said its staff would monitor the visit on 24 October 2023 and ensure it was completed.
  7. On 24 October 2023 the resident emailed the landlord saying its contractors had not attended to clean the windows as agreed. The landlord replied the following day saying its contractors did not attend as they attended another block, and the appointment time of 24 October 2023 was used for a different repair. The resident was told by the landlord its contractors said they would return the week of 6 November 2023. The resident emailed the landlord for an update on 30 October 2023.
  8. The resident contacted us on 2 November 2023 as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and wanted us to investigate her concerns. On 1 December 2023 the resident said window cleaners attended the property the day prior, but did not clean all the windows.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The Ombudsman’s investigation will only consider events that took place until the landlord’s final complaint response, and any actions it committed to. We are satisfied the complaint about was about lack of window cleaning services and exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure in October 2023. Any issues or events that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required, including quality of works. This is because the landlord needs a reasonable opportunity to consider issues, prior to involvement from us. Therefore, the scope of this investigation will be until 1 December 2023 when the resident emailed the landlord about its contractor that attended the property for window cleaning as set out in its final response.
  2. Additionally, the resident told us she was unhappy with the level of service charge for the landlord’s window cleaning services. We cannot consider complaints which concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase. The resident may wish to refer this aspect of her complaint to the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) who consider service charge disputes between leaseholders and landlords.

Window cleaning services

  1. The landlord accepted failings with the length of time the resident was without window cleaning services. The landlord also admitted it had provided misinformation to the resident, and it said it did not keep her updated. Where there are admitted failings, as in this case, we will consider whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles and remedies guidance. The principles of effective dispute resolution are:
    1. Be fair, treat people fairly, and follow fair processes.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. Under the lease provisions, the resident was required to pay service charges which contributed to the costs incurred by the landlord for services undertaken. The landlord’s compensation guidance also states it would provide refunds where there have been periods of reduced or lost services experienced by residents.
  3. The landlord did not dispute during its investigation into the complaint that the resident had not received window cleaning services. Therefore, it was appropriate that the landlord offered a full refund in its stage 1 complaint response for the window cleaning services. We have seen evidence that the landlord processed a refund of £243.22 for the lack of window cleaning services across 2 years. This was in line with its compensation guidance.
  4. It was reasonable the landlord apologised for providing the resident misinformation before she complained, about responsibility to clean the windows. The landlord clarified in its stage 1 complaint response that it would clean the resident’s windows twice per year, as well as the communal windows. The landlord’s communication about this was clear and reasonable.
  5. We acknowledge some of the delays in carrying out the window cleaning services were due to safety concerns, safety equipment, and the landlord’s requirement to carry out an inspection. The landlord failed to carry out the inspection until June 2023, even though the landlord was aware that a safety inspection was overdue since February 2023. This 4-month delay was unreasonable, and the landlord was not proactive in keeping the resident updated. Also, the landlord did not proactively communicate with its teams after the inspection. As evidenced in its stage 2 complaint response, it failed to instruct its own team to start the window cleaning services. Therefore, its communication was poor.
  6. Under the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, consideration is given for time and trouble caused to a resident by service failures.
  7. The evidence shows the resident experienced time and trouble in pursuing a response and further action by the landlord regarding the window cleaning services. She chased the landlord 7 times between February 2023 and September 2023 inclusive. The landlord offered £100 to the resident in recognition of the time and trouble she experienced since its stage 1 complaint response. However, issues persisted after its final response.
  8. The landlord said its contractor would carry out the window cleaning on 24 October 2023, the evidence shows this did not happen. The resident had to chase the landlord again for a response and it was not until 30 November 2023 that its contractors provided window cleaning services. There is no evidence the landlord proactively updated the resident after the week of 6 November 2023 had elapsed, as it had not carried out the window cleaning services as stated. This was unreasonable action by the landlord.
  9. While the £100 offered by the landlord went some way in putting things right, the issue was not resolved in the timeframes stated by the landlord. This demonstrated that errors were being repeated and overall, the landlord had not learnt from outcomes. Therefore, we cannot consider that reasonable redress was offered.
  10. Overall, the landlord communicated poorly with the resident throughout the complaint and failed to manage her expectations regarding when window cleaning services would commence. However, it is clear the landlord made efforts to put things right prior to our involvement which included a full refund of the window cleaning service charges. Taking this into account, we would have found maladministration, but we have found service failure in the resident’s reports of not receiving window cleaning services from the landlord via service charges. The resident expended a further 2 months of time and trouble after exhausting the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. She was told incorrect dates by the landlord (24 October 2023 and week of 6 November 2023) for when window cleaning services would start, but it did not.
  11. As such, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay an additional £50 to the resident for the further approximate 2 months of time and trouble expended by her. This is reflective of our guidance on remedies for service failures of this duration.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure in the complaint about the resident’s reports of not receiving window cleaning services from the landlord via service charges.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must pay £150 to the resident comprised of:
    1. An additional £50 to the resident for the time and trouble expended after its stage 2 complaint response until December 2023.
    2. The £100 it offered in its stage 2 complaint response of October 2023, if not paid already.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with this order to this Service.