Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (202307054)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202307054

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint about his rent accounts and arrears.

Background

2. The resident held 3 occupancy arrangements at different properties owned by the landlord between November 2003 and July 2023. This report will refer to properties A, B, C and D. Property C is the tenancy from 30 July 2012, until the resident moved into Property D in July 2023. Property A and B are former tenancies (November 2003 to January 2004, and August 2005 to August 2012).
3. The resident has mental health conditions which the landlord is aware of.
4. In February 2023, the resident contacted the landlord as he had received a text message about arrears. It said this was because his housing benefit payments were paid in arrears. It asked him to make a payment each week to eventually pay in advance, but he could not at the time. It agreed to prevent automatic contact via text due to the impact of these on his mental health.
5. We wrote to the landlord on 30 May 2023 and asked it to raise a stage 1 complaint for the resident. Specifically, his concerns that:
   1. There were arrears on his rent account when he moved into property C. He needed to accept the property because he was homeless. He asked for the reason for the arrears, but it did not provide this.
   2. It added his water bill arrears to his rent account, but did not provide rent account statements. He said he had overpaid £3,700 into the accounts.
6. The landlord sent a stage 1 complaint response on 13 June 2023. It found that:
   1. There were no arrears at the start of the tenancy at property C. The first charge was for rent on 30 July 2012. It only charged the weekly rent payments on a Monday. It apologised that he needed to request information multiple times.
   2. There were 2 former debts for properties A and B which were shown in the tenancy agreement for property C. It discussed these during a home visit in September 2012 when it set up payment plans.
   3. It discussed the arrears with the resident’s representatives in March 2018 and November 2020.
   4. It had taken payments directly from his benefits to pay for the water charges and toward the debts. This was because housing benefit payments did not cover water charges. Once this was paid, it stopped the deductions from his benefits.
   5. It did not find any overpayments. It provided a current rent statement and statements for properties A and B.
7. On 21 June 2023, we asked the landlord to respond to the complaint at stage 2.
8. In its stage 2 complaint response on 8 August 2023, the landlord:
   1. Explained the reasons for the debts on the accounts for property A and B.
   2. Said it did not find that he overpaid into the accounts. It gave the total charges, housing benefit payments, payments made directly, and the balance on his current rent account for property C.
   3. Said it began to collect water charges for the water provider in April 2005. It included these in the weekly rent charge.
   4. Offered to meet him to discuss the accounts. It said it could have helped him understand the accounts sooner. It offered £200 as a goodwill gesture.
9. The resident asked us to investigate because:
   1. The stress caused by the communication about arrears affected his mental health and recovery. The landlord sent threatening letters but did not accept that housing benefit payments were not paid in advance. He made overpayments and wanted it to look at this again.
   2. He said he did not live at Property A and needed to move out of Property B for his safety as he was attacked. He wanted the landlord to apologise for the ongoing issues with his rent accounts at Property D and fully explain the water payments and arrears.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

10. The resident said that the confusion about his rent accounts and arrears impacted his mental health. He felt the landlord discriminated against him. It is not our role to decide if the landlord directly affected the resident’s health or if it discriminated against him. We will look at whether it considered his health conditions and any general distress the situation caused.
11. We consider events that happened within the 12 months before a complaint. In this case, this was May 2022. It is not our role to decide if the resident is liable for rent payments or charges. The investigation will not audit the rent accounts or make a decision about the repair recharges, or historical rent charges. The investigation focuses on the landlord’s actions in the 12 months before the complaint in May 2023 and its complaint responses.
12. The resident says he has problems with the rent account at his current property (property D). This was not part of the complaint we are considering. We will not consider his further concerns within this investigation. He said he raised a new complaint and was waiting for a meeting alongside the landlord and his representatives, and its stage 2 complaint response.

Policies

13. The tenancy agreement for Property C states that the rent and water payments were a combined weekly charge. It also said that the resident owed £752.42 (including water charges) from his tenancies at Property A and B.
14. An example agreement detailing the terms of the tenancy states that:
    1. The resident is responsible for paying the rent, including the water and other charges. This is due on a Monday in advance.
    2. The resident is responsible for paying rent or other charges associated with former tenancies.
    3. If a resident fails to make payments, the landlord may take legal action.
15. The landlord’s income and arrears recovery policies and procedures show how it recovers arrears and debts on its residents’ rent accounts. This includes asking for payments in full or setting up payment plans to clear any arrears. Where a resident has vulnerabilities, it should also consider working with other agencies or using specific contact methods when communicating about a debt.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint about his rent accounts and arrears.

16. There is a history of communication with the resident regarding his rent account from 2012 to 2021. In this period, he raised concern that he was paying toward a debt that did not exist as he was receiving housing benefit payments for his rent. The landlord explained that the housing benefit payments did not cover ongoing water charges. There was some confusion about the amount of arrears. Automatic communications showed both rent and water balances together. These did not show what amount was due for rent (payable through housing benefit) and what amount was for water (payable by the resident).
17. The communication focused on setting up payment plans for arrears on the account, signposting and referring the resident to relevant financial and mental health support agencies and explaining the reasons for the arrears. The landlord stopped automatic communication about arrears at different stages due to his mental health conditions. As we explained above, the landlord’s handling of his concerns before 2022 are not part of this investigation.
18. We have considered each aspect of the resident’s dispute about rent charges below:

The resident’s concern that the landlord combines the rent and water charges.

19. The resident raised concern that the landlord combined the rent and water charges. The landlord has confirmed that it collected water charges on behalf of the water supplier in 2005 and these were included within the overall rent figure. The tenancy agreement for property C confirms that the water charge was part of the overall weekly rent payment.
20. The resident said that he wanted the landlord to explain the different rent and water arrears more fully as a resolution to the complaint. We understand that this is because the water charge was not covered by the resident’s housing benefit payments. He was responsible for making direct payments to the rent account alongside the housing benefit payments to cover the cost of the water charge. He has maintained that any arrears caused by the rent part of the charge should be paid by housing benefit.
21. The rent account statements show that the resident made regular payments of £4 toward the water charge element of the rent charge in 2022 and 2023. When the landlord received the housing benefit payments (monthly), his account moved into a small credit. The tenancy agreement confirms that he agreed to pay rent (and other charges) in advance. There is no evidence to show that the landlord enforced this.
22. The landlord’s records also show that it took steps to support him in understanding the water arrears and charge in May 2023. The water provider asked for information to show whether the resident still qualified for a lower tariff. The landlord acted reasonably by clearly explaining what evidence he needed to provide. It communicated with his representative at the time to process the application. It acted appropriately by confirming the amount he needed to pay after the assessment and reminded him to increase his standing order payments so he did not fall behind. These steps were reasonable to support him.
23. We understand that any letters or communication that show the full amount of arrears might cause confusion where a resident only pays a part of the charge directly. The landlord took reasonable steps to stop automatic communication to support him at the time and prevent unnecessary stress. It also spoke to him when he needed to increase the payments to make sure he did not fall behind. The landlord acted reasonably by confirming that it could meet with him to discuss his concerns within its stage 2 complaint response, showing that it was willing to provide a further explanation.
24. We have not found a failing. We recommend that the landlord considers whether it is possible to change the format of any automatic communication to show the separate figures owed for different parts of the overall rent charge. This is so that it can be clearer in communication to residents that receive benefits which do not cover certain charges.

The resident’s concern that the landlord had not responded to him.

25. In his complaint, the resident said he had asked for statements and information about the arrears on his rent account but the landlord did not provide this. We have not found any failure by the landlord to respond to him between 2022 and 2023. This is because there is no evidence to show that the resident raised any concerns about the reasons for the arrears in the year before his complaint. Other than 2 occasions in February and May 2023, we have not seen that he raised any concerns or asked for information in 2022 or 2023.
26. On 1 February 2023, the resident said he got a text message about rent arrears. The landlord acted reasonably by explaining that the automated message was because his rent payments (made via housing benefit) were paid in arrears. It was reasonable for it to ask him whether he could make additional payments so that he was paying in advance. This is in line with the terms of his tenancy. It did not enforce this and confirmed it would stop automatic communication again to prevent any unnecessary impact on his mental health.
27. The landlord acted reasonably within its complaint responses by confirming that it had discussed the rent account and reasons for the arrears with the resident and various representatives in September 2012, March 2018, and November 2020. This is supported by its communication records. We have also seen evidence that it explained the reason for the arrears in September 2019, and January 2021, and communicated further in August 2021. The records confirm that the resident received the rent account statements in March 2021.

The resident’s concerns about arrears and former debts.

28. The resident said that there were arrears already on the rent account for property C, but he needed to accept the tenancy as he was homeless. The landlord is allowed to recover debts from former tenancies. This would have been the case whether he accepted the tenancy for property C in 2012 or not.
29. The landlord acted reasonably by explaining that the debts for his former tenancies were not added directly to the rent account but were listed in the tenancy agreement. It provided rent statements showing that the accounts were separated. There was some communication regarding the former debts in 2012 and 2018. The landlord’s records show that it sent a letter to the resident and his representative in March 2018 regarding the debts at property A and B which confirmed the reasons the debts were owed. We have not seen a copy of the letter.
30. The landlord acted reasonably in its complaint responses. It explained the reasons for the debts at property A and B. The resident said he did not move into property A due to the terms of his probation at the time. As he did not end the tenancy, the landlord charged rent and then sent a Notice to Quit (to end the tenancy) and change the locks. The resident believes he does not owe the landlord for property A as he did not move in. It is not our role to decide on whether the resident is liable for these payments as liability for rent payments is decided by the First Tier Tribunal.
31. The landlord said the debt for property B was £690.11. This is in line with the rent account statements. It said the debt was a combination of unpaid rent and water charges, and repair recharges (which it charges for repairs needed due to damage to the property).
32. While the landlord explained the reasons for the debt for rent and water charges, it could have done more to explain the repair recharges. We can see that these were charged in March 2006 and April 2008. In fairness, given the time between those charges and the complaint, the landlord might not have had communication records to confirm what these were for.
33. We can see that the arrears for properties A and B, including the repair recharges were “written off” in 2012 and 2015. The statements show these accounts were at a £0 balance. It would have been helpful for the landlord to explain why the debts showed as zero, and whether these were still owed in its responses. The landlord has confirmed to us that the debts were written off and it has not pursued this debt. Its lack of clarity was a shortcoming.

The residents concerns that he had overpaid £3,700 into the accounts.

34. The resident believes he has overpaid at least £3,700 into the rent accounts. Where a resident has paid more than is owed to the landlord (an overpayment), this would show as a credit.
35. We are not auditing the statements as part of the investigation and do not have specific information about the rent and water figures at each stage other than within the rent statements. The rent statements show that the landlord charged a weekly figure. There is no evidence to show that it added charges that were unrelated to a weekly overall rent and water charge. The 2 repair recharges for repairs in 2006 and 2008 were handled separately to the main rent accounts.
36. The rent statements for properties A, B, and C show that the resident paid more than £3,700 directly into the 3 accounts. There were periods where 2 accounts (properties B and C) were in some credit but this was not a significant amount. The accounts would fall back into arrears due to the weekly rent (and water) charges. There were also periods where the resident did not make individual payments (in parts of 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2017, 2018, and 2020), and periods where no housing benefit payments were made. We see that the lack of payment made the arrears increase during these times.
37. We have not seen evidence to show that the resident overpaid into the accounts based on the information provided. If the resident feels that the weekly charges on the rent statements are incorrect, he may wish to seek independent advice to audit the accounts.

Conclusion

38. Within its responses, the landlord acted reasonably by acknowledging that it could have supported the resident more to understand the account fully at an earlier stage. Its historical records suggest that it had tried to explain this in the past. While it could have provided more information about the outstanding debts within its complaint responses, this was not a significant failing. It was reasonable for it to offer £200 as a gesture of goodwill.

Determination

39. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s complaint about his rent accounts and arrears.

Recommendations

40. We recommend that:
    1. The landlord pays the resident £200 as previously offered, if it has not already done so.
    2. The landlord arranges a meeting with the resident and his representatives to discuss the ongoing complaint about the rent account at property D (the current property). It should tell him when it will respond to his complaint at stage 2.
    3. The landlord considers whether it is possible to change the format of any automatic communication to show the separate figures owed for rent and other charges, or an alternative. This is so that it can be clearer in communication to residents that receive benefits which do not cover certain charges.
41. The landlord should tell us if it will act on the recommendations within 4 weeks.