Peabody Trust (202320040)

Background

1. The landlord uses an External Managing Agent (EMA) to provide services. The resident complained in May 2023 that he had not received a breakdown of service charges during the 2 years he had lived at the property.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Response to the resident’s request for information about service charges.
   2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s:
   1. Response to the resident’s request for information about service charges.
   2. Complaint handling.
4. We have made no orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord provided detailed service charge breakdowns in the stage 2 complaint response and offered reasonable compensation.
6. The landlord acknowledged the delay in giving its complaint responses and offered reasonable compensation.

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.

7. Evidence shows the resident made a complaint on 15 May 2023; there is no evidence that this request had been made before this date. Within the complaint, the resident said that he was concerned that he had not received a summary of charges for the building as he had been at the property for 2 years and never received a breakdown.
8. The landlord apologised and explained in the stage 1 response the service charges were supposed to be charged directly from the EMA, but this was not actioned properly. The landlord explained it was working out the service charge breakdown for the April 2022 to March 2023 period, although it failed to comment on the current year’s estimation (April 2023 to March 2024). This was not reasonable, as the resident had requested a breakdown and although the landlord apologised and explained that it was working out the previous year’s breakdown, the landlord failed to explain why it was unable to provide a breakdown for the current year.
9. The resident responded on the same day and explained he was looking for information about the service charges for April 2023 to March 2024. He contacted the landlord on multiple occasions requesting updates. The landlord apologised for the delay and explained it was chasing the EMA for the breakdown requested and would share the information when they received it. Though the landlord delayed in responding to the resident’s requests, the response was deemed reasonable, as the landlord was unable to determine the EMA’s response times. However, the resident continued to request updates from the landlord without success from August 2023. This was a missed opportunity, and the landlord should have provided updates to the resident in the interim while waiting for the EMA’s response.
10. The landlord gave the information requested within its stage 2 response. It also apologised for the delays to giving responses and offered further compensation of £75 for the time, trouble and inconvenience. The compensation offered has been considered holistically in relation to the whole case as the landlord said this was for delays, poor complaint handling and time, trouble and inconvenience. In our view, its actions resolved the complaint satisfactorily.

11. The resident raised his complaint on 15 May 2023 which was responded to on 8 June 2023. The landlord’s complaint policy says that stage 1 complaints should be responded to within 10 working days. The landlord failed to meet the complaint policy timeframe and responded to the complaint in 17 working days. However, the landlord acknowledged this failing and awarded compensation which was deemed reasonable for the delay.
12. On 21 July 2023, the resident requested an escalation to stage 2 as he was unhappy with the stage 1 complaint response. The landlord provided the stage 2 complaint response on 2 November 2023. The landlord’s complaint policy says that stage 2 complaints should be responded to within 20 working days. The landlord failed to meet the complaint policy timeframe and responded to the complaint in 74 working days. However, the landlord acknowledged this failing and awarded additional compensation of £200 in recognition of poor complaint handling. This was deemed reasonable redress for the overall failings.

Learning

13. The landlord failed to provide the initial complaint to the Ombudsman when originally requested. It should make sure it sends all relevant information for future investigations.