Clarion Housing Association Limited (202318587)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202318587

Clarion Housing Association Limited

28 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the termination of the tenancy, which resulted in rent arrears under the former tenancy.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident was a secure tenant of the landlord. The property was a 3-bedroom house. A lot of the communication with the landlord was done by the resident’s husband. For ease, I will refer to any party communicating on the resident’s behalf as “the resident” in this case.
The resident completed an end of tenancy form. She said this was due to issues she experienced with her neighbours. The landlord was given a copy of this. The form was dated 28 March 2022, but the receipt of the form by the landlord is unknown.
The resident and the landlord spoke over the phone on 14 April 2022. The resident had not paid rent for March 2022. She said she would call it on 19 April 2022 to make payment, then resume rent payments from 30 April 2022.
The landlord sent a letter to the resident on 25 April 2022 asking for payment of outstanding arrears of £1,049.83. It said she needed to pay the debt immediately to avoid it taking recovery action. It asked her to contact it if she could not make immediate payment. It wrote to her again on 10 May 2022 asking for a payment of the arrears totalling £1,322.89.
The resident spoke to the landlord over the phone on 11 May 2022. She said she had moved out of the property to Jersey a month earlier because of anti-social behaviour (ASB) issues with a neighbour. She was still attending the property to collect her belongings. She said she received the end of tenancy form and promised to fill it out.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 19 May 2022 about the outstanding arrears, saying that she could view her rent account and calculate benefits from her electronic devices.
The landlord and resident spoke over the phone on 27 May 2022 and confirmed she was still moving out of the property, and would have finished emptying it by the weekend. It said it would charge rent until she confirmed she had moved out and left the keys in the keysafe.
The resident telephoned the landlord on 15 June 2023 to raise a complaint. She had received a letter from a debt collection agency asking for payment of outstanding arrears of £1,869.01. She believed she had already settled her rent account, and said she returned the keys to the property in June 2022. The landlord explained that residents are liable for rent until they return their keys, and that her tenancy ended the first week of June 2022. There was outstanding rent for the period between 7 March 2022 and 6 June 2022. She said it took the landlord 3 months to respond to her notice to vacate.
She asked about the time limits on vacating the property and its response time obligations. It said that she could speak to another team about the end of tenancy procedure. It reiterated that she was liable for the outstanding rental charges as she had not returned the key until June 2022.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 15 June 2023 and acknowledged her complaint. It understood she wanted an explanation for the arrears, for it to remove the arrears, and provide an explanation for a lack of communication. It said someone would make contact within 20 working days.
The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 27 June 2023. It confirmed:
1. The resident had terminated the tenancy and returned the keys in June 2022, and she felt that it was responsible for termination delays.
2. The resident wanted an explanation for the arrears of £1861.01, an explanation for the lack of communication, and for it to remove the arrears.
3. It uses the services of a debt collection agency to complete most of its former tenant work.
4. Its letter from April 2022 said the notice period of 28 days would not start until she returned the termination form.
5. It became aware of her request to move out on 16 May 2022 when it emailed the tenancy termination form.
6. It took the 4-week notice period for the tenancy termination from the date of the form being returned on 17 May 2022, which is in line with its internal processes and procedures.
7. There was no mention of the resident and her family having left the property at the time of her 14 April 2022 phone call.
8. The resident told it she was still accessing the property on 11 May 2022 to remove belongings.
9. It had not made an error, the arrears were correct, and it was not upholding the complaint.
10. The resident could escalate the complaint or ask the Service for support.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 5 July 2023. She said she first contacted it in February 2022 about ending her tenancy, but she did not receive any correspondence. She chased it for a response 7 weeks later. She was willing to pay one month of outstanding of rent. She said she did not return the keys until June 2022 due to working and living outside of the UK. She explained she left the house empty by 14 February 2022, leaving only rubbish on the drive. She said she left the rubbish on the drive until she received notification from the landlord about the end of tenancy, but it took 3 months for it to terminate the tenancy.
She explained that she had been in touch with the landlord about a different issue after she left the property, during which time she asked if there were any outstanding issues. She stated the landlord told her there was not. She was unhappy that the landlord had not explained why it made no contact about the arrears for over a year, despite it having her email addresses and phone numbers. She felt it should have contacted her to discuss the matter.
The landlord spoke to the resident over the phone on 7 August 2023. It apologised for the delay in handling her complaint and acknowledged her escalation request. She recalled contacting it on 14 February 2022 to say she wished to end her tenancy, but it told her the termination form could not be emailed. She provided her Jersey postal address, but said she did not receive the form. She contacted it again in March 2022 and was advised the form could be emailed.
She said there were more delays, and the landlord sent the form on 16 May 2022, which they returned the following day. She said the landlord did not tell her of the arrears, nor that she had to post the keys to the property through the lock box. She was happy to pay the missed rent for March 2022 as payment did not go through due to a banking issue, but not for subsequent months. The landlord said it aimed to provide a response within 20 working days, providing an update no later than 5 September 2023.
The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 23 August 2023. It apologised for the delay in responding to the complaint and confirmed:
1. It had investigated the time taken to terminate the tenancy, as the resident believed its delays were responsible for the keys not being handed over until June 2022.
2. The resident said she had emptied the property in February 2022.
3. She was unhappy with how long it took the landlord and debt collector to chase the arrears on the account and wanted an explanation why.
4. She wanted either the tenancy termination date changing to reflect 28 days from her contact with the landlord in February 2022, or to have arrears for April, May and June 2022 to be removed.
5. It sent the termination form and cover letter to the property on 26 April 2022, which explained that the 28-day notice period would not start until she returned the termination form.
6. It did not receive a response until she contacted it on 16 May 2022, when she made it aware of her intention to give up the tenancy.
7. It received the termination form and no further contact until she raised a complaint.
8. It had spoken to the resident about the March 2022 missed payment on 14 April 2022, and she promised that payments would resume from 30 April 2022, suggesting she was aware of her responsibility to pay the rent.
9. Another phone conversation from 11 May 2022 confirmed she was still collecting belongings from the property, and she was still accessing the property.
10. It could not refer the case to the debt collector sooner as it had been affected by a cyber-security incident, and it could only provide them with the resident’s old address.
11. The resident did not provide a forwarding address.
12. The arrears of £1,869.01 were fair and accurate, but it offered £50 compensation for the delay in responding to the complaint, which would be offset against the arrears.
13. The resident could take her complaint to the Service.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). When a complaint is brought to this Service, The Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
Paragraph 42 of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints that:
1. were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising.
The resident said that they had to move because she experienced ASB from a neighbour, but there is no evidence of an ASB complaint being raised within 12 months of the matter occurring. The Service is therefore unable to consider this element of the complaint. However, we can consider how the landlord handled the termination of the tenancy and the arrears that accrued under the former tenancy.

The landlord’s obligations, policies, and procedures

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are be fair (treat people fairly and follow fair processes), put things right and learn from outcomes. The Ombudsman must first consider whether there was a failing by the landlord and, did this lead to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If yes, we will consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’. When failings are identified, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord has put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in all the circumstances of the case.
The landlord’s end of tenancy form says that by submitting the completed form, a resident is providing notice of ending the tenancy. The resident agrees that the property will be empty and unoccupied at the point of return.
The landlord’s arrears policy states that all residents are responsible for payments in line with their tenancy agreement, and that it will robustly manage non-payments. It will act firmly and fairly in the recovery of any monies due, reserving the right to take any reasonable recovery action. Its recovery policy says that it will keep contact with its residents insofar as possible throughout the period that they have arrears on their accounts.
Its complaint policy states that when a complaint is made, it would acknowledge and logged this at stage 1 of it complaints procedure within 10 working days of receipt. It would aim to respond within 20 working days of the complaint being logged. If a resident is unhappy with the outcome at stage 1, it will escalate the complaint to stage 2 in 10 working days. It would aim to resolve stage 2 complaints within 40 working days.
The landlord’s compensation policy says that it will consider compensation for a failure to meet service standards for actions and responses, and that it will use compensation payments to offset rent or other arrears.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) relevant to the time of the complaint says that landlords should response to a stage 1 complaint within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. Extensions at stage 2 should not exceed 10 working days without good reason.

The termination of the tenancy

The resident’s specific concerns about the landlord’s handling of the termination of the tenancy are about the number of months of rent owed, delays in terminating the tenancy, a lack of communication, and using debt collectors without notice.
The landlord has provided a copy of a signed tenancy termination form dated 28 March 2022. The Service does not know when this form was received by the landlord as the resident told the landlord in a phone call from 11 May 2022 that she was going to fill the form out and return it. Even if the form was returned as early as March 2022, she would be aware of what the termination process was because it explains that the property needs to be empty. The evidence shows that the property was still being emptied in May 2022. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to not terminate the tenancy earlier.
The resident was still moving out of the property at this time, and told the landlord on 27 May 2022 that she would have finished emptying it by the weekend. It said it would charge rent until she confirmed she had moved out and left the keys in the key safe. The resident did not tell the landlord that there was only rubbish left on the driveway. This is also why it was reasonable for the landlord not to have terminated the tenancy earlier.
The landlord was in regular contact with the resident for the period March – June 2022, guiding her through the end of tenancy process. It is clear from the notes that she was being made aware that she was responsible for rent payments. In the phone conversation from 14 April 2022, she acknowledged she had not paid the rent. She promised to make this payment on 19 April 2022, and resume payments from 30 April 2022. This does not show that the resident expected to have no further rent responsibilities after making a payment for March 2022.
The landlord wrote to the resident several times in April and May 2022, keeping her updated with the total amount of rental arrears, and explaining that further action could be taken if the arrears were not cleared. This shows that it made her aware that the amount of rent for which she was responsible had increased and was outstanding. There is no record of the resident disputing the arrears at the time nor was there reference to the landlord delaying the termination process.
It is usual for landlords to use debt collection agencies for former tenant arrears. The Service understands that contact from a debt collector can cause stress, especially some time after the termination of the tenancy. However, the resident was already made aware of the money owed through arrears letters. The landlord did not acted unreasonably in using a debt collection agency instead of making telephone contact with the resident.
The resident claimed that she spoke to the landlord about a different issue after moving out of the property. During the conversation, she had asked if there were any outstanding issues. She said it told her there were none. The Service has seen no evidence of this conversation, and we do not know the context of any information it provided to her. If the landlord had provided incorrect information, the Service would ask it to be more careful in its communication. However, it would not mean the arrears were no longer payable.
On balance, the Ombudsman is satisfied that there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of concerns about the rent arrears. It was not responsible for any delays in terminating the tenancy. The resident had to vacate the property and return the keys before the tenancy could end. It provided sufficient communication in its letters and phone calls for the period March to June 2022. Its letters confirmed what arrears were outstanding, and that it could taken further action to recover the funds. Had the landlord provided any misleading information in a conversation after termination, this would not invalidate the arrears.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint handling timescales did not reflect the Code relevant to the time of the complaint. We have therefore considered the landlord’s complaint handling in line with the Code, as these are the timescales a complaint handling policy should have adhered to.
The resident raised her complaint on 15 June 2022, which the landlord acknowledged on the same day. It sent its stage 1 response within 10 working days, and it addressed all complaint points. The Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord adhered to the Code’s complaint handling guidelines at stage 1 of its complaint process.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 5 July 2022, which it acknowledged on 7 August 2022. It then sent its stage 2 response on 23 August 2023. This was approximately 3 weeks outside of timescales set by the Code, which it acknowledged. If offered the resident £50 compensation for its complaint handling delays. It also addressed all complaint points raised.
On balance, the Ombudsman is satisfied that there has been reasonable redress by the landlord about its complaint handling. It addressed all complaint points at both stages of its complaint process and adhered to the Code’s complaint handling timescales at stage 1. At stage 2, it acknowledged its complaint handling delays and offered compensation which reflected the approximate 3-week delay. The delay did not affect the substantive issue regarding the handling of arrears. The landlord also said that it would offset compensation against arrears. This is stated in its compensation policy.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of concerns about rent arrears.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord offset the £50 compensation it offered at stage 2 against the resident’s rent arrears, if it has not already done so.