Southern Housing (202309939)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202309939

Southern Housing

13 February 2025

(amended 4 March 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 handling of the resident’s request for a breakdown of service charges.
2. The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident has been a shared ownership leaseholder at the property since 22 December 2005. The property is a 2-bedroom second floor flat. The resident is vulnerable due to a diagnosed mental health condition. However, the landlord’s records do not reflect this.
4. On 10 January 2023 the resident asked the landlord to provide a “written summary of the relevant costs incurred” in respect of the property. She said that this was in accordance with section 21 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
5. On 14 February 2023 the resident complained that the landlord had not provided the written summary of relevant costs as requested.
6. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 28 February 2023 and provided a response on 22 March 2023. It said that the year-end service charge accounts for the block for 2021-2022 were not yet complete. However, they expected them to be finalised in the next 2 weeks. It apologised for its poor communication regarding this and upheld her complaint. It provided an action plan which said that she should receive the information by 24 April 2023. It said that it would monitor the action plan to ensure it complied with it. It offered £105 compensation comprising:
   1. £25 for its failure to respond to her initial request.
   2. £15 for its failure to update her.
   3. £15 for its failure to respond to her complaint within the correct timescale.
   4. £50 for the inconvenience she had suffered due to the delay.
7. On 27 April 2023 the resident emailed the landlord to advise it that she had still not received the information. The landlord apologised and said that the accounts had taken longer than expected. It said that it should be able to provide the breakdown by 12 May 2023.
8. The resident emailed the landlord on 14 May 2023. She said she would like to complain that she had still not received the requested information. On 31 May 2023 she asked the landlord to escalate the complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process.
9. On 5 June 2023 the landlord sent a letter to the resident. This included a service charge statement for April 2021-March 2022.
10. On 19 June 2023 the resident clarified that the statement sent on 5 June 2023 only included a summary of the service charges and did not provide a full breakdown. She also asked for a full breakdown of service charges for 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, and 2022-2023.
11. The landlord provided a stage 2 complaint response on 14 July 2023 in which it told the resident:
    1. It had enclosed a full copy of the service charge accounts for 2019-2020, 2020-21 and 2021-2022.
    2. If she wanted to see copies of invoices and supporting documents for 2021-2022, she should let them know.
    3. It had not yet received the accounts for 2022-2023 so had enclosed the budget instead.
    4. It increased the offer of compensation to £245 comprising:
       1. £15 for miscommunication.
       2. £15 for repeated failure to respond to the original request.
       3. £15 for failure to respond to the complaint within an appropriate timeframe.
       4. £25 for its failure to respond to her request.
       5. £100 for its unsatisfactory handling of her complaint.
       6. £75 discretionary compensation.
    5. It also said that it had:
       1. Put in additional measures to make sure that it monitored requests for service charge breakdowns made under section 21 more closely.
       2. Agreed a quicker process with its external accountants to ensure that it could provide the certification of section 21 summaries more quickly.
12. The resident advised us in February 2025 that the information provided with the stage 2 complaint response answered her original query. However, she has further service charge queries that she requires a response to.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

13. The Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, concern matters where it would be quicker, fairer, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure.
14. The resident expressed concern that the landlord failed to comply with its obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. We cannot decide whether the landlord satisfied the relevant part of the act, as this decision is more appropriate for the courts. Our role is to consider the evidence that is available and determine whether the landlord responded to the resident’s request, in an appropriate and reasonable way, and if not, what steps it has taken to put things right.

Provision of service charge breakdown

15. On 10 January 2023 the resident asked for a breakdown of the service charges for April 2021- March 2022. We have seen no evidence that the landlord responded to this request. This communications failure cost the resident time and trouble because she had to make a complaint.
16. The landlord then told the resident that it would provide the information 3 further times. It failed to do so and also failed to keep her informed of the reasons for the delay. This meant that she had to contact it again several times, costing her further time and trouble.
17. The landlord advised the resident that the reason for the delay was because it was waiting for account information to be provided. In accordance with the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on landlords’ engagement with private freeholders and managing agents (March 2022) the landlord should have ensured that it was proactive in pursuing account information for service charges to ensure it could provide them to the resident in a timely manner. In addition, it should have ensured that it was regularly and transparently communicating with the resident about any delays in providing details about service charges, and the method of calculation. Its failure to do so caused further inconvenience to the resident and cost her time and trouble pursuing the matter.
18. In this case, the landlord took 6 months to provide the requested information which was unreasonable. Furthermore, it failed to communicate adequately with the resident which meant that she took time and trouble chasing a response. Therefore, there was service failure in its handling of her request for a breakdown of service charges.
19. However, the landlord ultimately provided the information requested, apologised, and detailed the changes it had made to its systems to prevent a delay in dealing with a similar request again. It also offered her £130 compensation which was in line with its compensation policy and which she accepted. We consider that the compensation and other remedies offered were adequate considering in the circumstances of the case.

Complaint handling

20. The landlord’s complaints policy says that it will acknowledge a stage 1 complaint within 5 days and respond fully within 10 days of the acknowledgement. It says that if it needs longer than 10 days to respond it will explain why and agree a new response date with the resident.
21. The landlord took 11 working days to acknowledge the stage 1 complaint and a further 17 working days to respond in full. We have seen no evidence that it gave the resident an explanation for the delay or agreed a new response date. This delay and failure to follow its policy meant that the resident was waiting longer for a resolution which caused her distress and inconvenience. It also delayed her access to an investigation by this Service.
22. The landlord’s complaints policy also says that it will acknowledge a request to escalate a complaint to stage 2 of the process within 5 working days.
23. There is evidence that the resident said that she wanted to escalate the complaint on 14 May 2023. She did not use the word ‘escalate’ but asked to complain again because she hadn’t received the requested information. The landlord failed to recognise this as an escalation request and did not open a new complaint. This failure delayed the resolution further causing the resident further distress and inconvenience. It also cost her time and trouble because she had to contact the landlord again.
24. The landlord’s complaints policy also said that it would respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
25. The landlord took a total of 33 working days to respond to the stage 2 complaint, after the resident asked it to escalate it the second time. This further delay caused her more distress and lengthened the delay in access to an investigation by this Service.
26. The landlord failed to follow its own policy which caused delays. It also failed to identify that the resident had asked it to escalate the complaint costing her time and trouble. Therefore, there was service failure in its handling of the complaint.
27. However, the landlord acknowledged that it had not adhered to its own timescales and apologised for this. It also investigated why it had not escalated the complaint at an earlier stage and found that the request had been sent to the wrong department. It apologised for this and explained what it had done to ensure this did not happen in the future. It also offered her £115 compensation to reflect the delays and unsatisfactory handling of the complaint, which was in line with its compensation policy and which she accepted. The Ombudsman considers the compensation and other remedies offered to be adequate considering the circumstances of the case.

Determination (decision)

28. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its handling of the resident’s request for a breakdown of service charges.
29. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendations

30. The landlord should:
31. Pay the resident the compensation previously offered at stage 2 of the complaints process if it has not already done so.
32. Contact the resident to discuss any vulnerabilities she has. Update its records accordingly.
33. Ensure that it uses the learning from this case to improve the processes it has in place to respond to queries made under section 21 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
34. The landlord should contact the resident to discuss any outstanding queries she has regarding service charges and provide the information requested.