Notting Hill Genesis (202427481)

Background

1. The resident is a leaseholder and has occupied the property, since 2011. On 26 September 2023 the landlord wrote to the resident seeking payment of £468.07 for the service charge period 2022/2023. She contacted us in October 2024 because she felt the landlord had allowed the electricity supplier to bill inaccurately and at inflated prices that she did not agree with.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord pursuing back payment of service charges and not providing up to date details regarding the sinking fund.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was reasonable redress offered regarding the landlord pursuing back payment of service charges and not providing up to date details regarding the sinking fund.
5. There was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord made an offer at stage 2 to resolve the complaint, which was accepted.
7. Although the landlord did not formalise the agreed complaint resolution in writing within 20 working days, it had done so verbally and followed up in writing shortly after.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

8. Having advised been advised by the landlord that it was pursuing her for an additional £468.07 in service charges, the resident raised concerns that there may be an issue with the electricity charges in particular. Around the same time, the landlord received a large electricity bill and evidence shows it took a number of steps to obtain up to date meter readings and submit these to the electricity supplier to try and resolve the issue. 
9. In the meantime, the landlord accepted there had been an issue with the service charges when it responded to the resident’s complaint. It also accepted there had been a problem with the sink fund figures. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and agreed to waive the £468.07 from the resident’s service charge account. It would also pay her £150 compensation as a gesture of goodwill. In addition, it accepted there were missing contributions to the sinking fund due to poor record keeping, and it agreed to compensate her £2,118.45.
10. The landlord acted promptly having received the complaint and discussed its offer with the resident on 23 February 2024. This led to her sending an email which gave a “big thank you to (the landlord) for both your call yesterday and this morning delivering the unexpectedly good news to resolve my stage 2 complaint”. She went on to refer to it as a “fair and responsible landlord” and that the complaint had been brought to a “satisfactory conclusion”.
11. Having established there was an issue with the electricity bill which affected the service charge account, the landlord took steps to put things right. By waiving the additional service charge it had pursued, as well as compensating the resident for payments made in to the sink fund, it sought to put the resident back in to the position she should have been in had these issues not occurred. It apologised for what happened and explained it had learned from the mistake. In accordance with its complaints procedure, the landlord also offered additional compensation to recognise the inconvenience caused.
12. In our view, the landlord took reasonable steps to remedy matters for the resident, and importantly, the email she sent on 23 February 2024 indicates she was satisfied that her complaint had been resolved. We have therefore made a finding of reasonable redress on that basis.
13. When the resident referred the complaint to us in October 2024, this was as a result of being notified in September 2024, that there may be further service charges due to the electricity bill received in December 2023. She has also said the landlord has recently said it is pursuing her now for £572.11 in service charges. This is not something we can consider as it occurred after the original complaint was made. If the resident wants to make a new complaint to the landlord about those issues or about not receiving the 2023/4 accounts, she would need to exhaust its 2 stage complaints procedure first. In her comments to us, she has also referred to concerns she has over the electricity supplier’s tariff and charges, but that is not something we can consider. She would need to refer that issue to the First Tier Tribunal, as it relates to a dispute over service charges.

14. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint within 10 working days, as per its complaints policy at that time. The landlord addressed the issues raised and accepted a shortfall in its service and offered compensation, which was appropriate.
15. The landlord’s written stage 2 response was sent 6 days later than it should have been, according to its complaints policy. However, it had spoken with the resident on both 22 and 23 February 2024 about the complaint and reached an agreement with her in order to resolve it, as confirmed by the resident’s email of 23 February 2024. Therefore, the landlord did communicate well with the resident and respond and resolve the complaint within 20 working days, albeit that written confirmation was not sent until a few days later.
16. While there was a minor shortfall in the landlord’s service, it does not in our view amount to a failure, when it is clear that the complaint was resolved in a timely way and the resident was very happy with the outcome at the time. We therefore make a finding of no maladministration.