Notting Hill Genesis (202441711)

Decision
Case ID	202441711
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Notting Hill Genesis
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	28 January 2026

Background

1. The resident is elderly and lives with another elderly person in a flat in a converted building. They have physical and mental health disabilities. A separate organisation to the landlord is the superior landlord and owns the property. The resident complained about allegations of electricity theft as their electricity meter fed the communal electricity in the building. They also reported verbal harassment and manipulation from the property owner following them raising these concerns.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Reports of issues with the electricity meter including allegations of electricity theft.
   2. Reports about the conduct of the property owner.
   3. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Reports of issues with the electricity meter including allegations of electricity theft.
   2. Reports about the conduct of the property owner.
4. We have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of issues with the electricity meter including allegations of electricity theft

5. The landlord did not keep the resident updated when it contacted the property owner. It was not proactive in ensuring the property owner made payments to the resident for communal electricity usage after they agreed that the communal electricity was fed from the resident’s meter.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the conduct of the property owner

6. The landlord agreed to contact the property owner about their conduct. However, it delayed in doing so.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

7. There were delays in the landlord responding to the resident’s initial complaint. There were delays in the landlord requesting an extension at stage 2. It also did not fully address these failures in its responses.

Putting things right  

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: the apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. it has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 25 February 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £400 made up as follows: £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of issues with the electricity meter including allegations of electricity theft £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports about the property owner’s conduct. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s complaint. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 25 February 2026
3	Specific Order The landlord must contact the property owner and request details of any payments they have made to the resident. As outlined in its stage 2 response, it must then write to the resident outlining the information and next steps, if any. This should include information about the payments made and whether any payment is owed to the resident. A copy of the letter must be provided to us by the due date.	No later than 25 February 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend that the landlord ensures any tenancy agreements where communal electricity is fed from a resident’s meter include information about this.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
21 March and 16 May 2023	The resident said the property owner had not paid the electricity costs for the communal areas, and the landlord was not responding to their requests. They said over 10 devices from the communal area and other flats were connected to their electricity meter and they no longer wished to pay for this due to high energy costs. They requested immediate disconnection.
4 September 2024	The resident complained that the property owner was committing electricity theft. They said unknown devices were connected to their electricity meter without notice or consent. They said the landlord had offered £100 compensation as rewiring or disconnection would be too costly for the property owner. The resident asked the landlord to investigate the issue and disconnect the devices from their electricity meter.
1 October 2024	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said: it was normal practice in houses that had been converted to flats to run the communal electricity supply from a resident’s meter the property owner had told it that they were paying the resident £10 per month to cover the additional cost if the resident did not think this was adequate, they could submit electricity bills for it to assess if they were paying more than usual and then address this with the property owner it had a procedure in place for refunding costs where there was no separate electricity supply for communal areas and it was supplied from a resident’s meter it did not uphold the resident’s complaint because it disagreed there had been poor service as it investigated the matter, consulted with the property owners and offered a solution.
22 October 2024	The resident said they had not received any payments from the property owners. They requested details of these and said the landlord did not notify them in the tenancy agreement that communal electricity would come from their meter. They said an electrical engineer had issued an unsatisfactory report with a list of required works, including to install a separate meter for communal electricity. However, the property owners had withheld this, and the work remained incomplete. The resident also reported verbal harassment and manipulation from the property owner. They asked the landlord to address this as it created an intimidating and hostile living environment.
28 October 2024	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation. It said it would investigate and respond by 25 November 2024.
26 November 2024	The landlord said it needed more information to review the resident’s concerns. It apologised and said it would respond in full by 23 December 2024.
2 December 2024	The landlord apologised for the delay in escalating the resident’s complaint. It said it would consider its complaint handling as part of its investigation.
24 December 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It said: it would request proof of payments made to the resident by the property owner and discuss the concerns raised by the resident about their conduct it may not have a copy of the tenancy agreement, but it would look for any information provided to the resident about communal electricity when their tenancy started it had requested a copy of the recent electrical safety certificate it would monitor this and update the resident by 10 January 2025 it hoped to resolve the issues about the reimbursement for additional electricity usage it was awarding £100 compensation for trouble, inconvenience and upset.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred their complaint to us because they said the landlord had not updated them as promised. They said the landlord had since offered a conditional payment of £200 but a one-off payment was not a solution as it perpetuated the issue rather than resolving it. The resident wanted compensation, a separate meter to be installed to prevent unauthorised connections, all devices connected to their meter to be disconnected and harassment and threats of eviction from the property owner to stop.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of issues with the electricity meter including allegations of electricity theft
Finding	Service failure

What we did not investigate

8. The resident said he wanted the threats of eviction to stop. In this case, we can see legal proceedings were issued at court on 9 June 2025. The resident had the chance to raise this issue during those legal proceedings and may wish to seek independent legal advice about this issue if they wish. For this reason, we will not investigate the threats of eviction. 

What we did investigate

9. On 21 March 2023 the resident reported that the property owner had not made any payments for the electricity usage in the communal area. The landlord’s recordsshow that in April 2021it confirmed when the resident’s tenancy started and the property owner agreed to pay the resident £10 a month as the communal electricity was connected to their meter.The records also show the landlord emailed the property owner on 13 April 2023, and the situation was “okay”.
10. The resident raised further concerns about devices from communal areas and other flats being connected to their meter on 16 May 2023. They provided a screen shot of communication from the landlord saying it would refund £100. The landlord’s records show that it had agreed to this. However, it has not provided any evidence of it paying this.
11. The landlord asked the property owner to investigate if the communal lighting was connected to the resident’s meter on 3 June 2023. Its records show that the property owner had already confirmed this. The landlord and property owner exchanged emails on 11 July 2023. The landlord requested proof of the property owner making any payments for electricity costs incurred by the resident. The property owner said it would send the resident a cheque for £200 to cover electricity costs from May 2022 to December 2023. However, they had previously agreed to cover these costs from May 2021. The landlord did not raise this with the property owner or follow up to confirm they had issued the cheque.
12. Additionally, the landlord has not provided any evidence that it updated the resident during this period. The lease agreement between the property owner and landlord is silent on the issue of communal electricity. Nevertheless, the property owner had confirmed that the communal electricity was fed from the resident’s meter and said it would pay for the communal electricity usage in April 2021. The landlord did not confirm they had done this.
13. There is no evidence that the resident contacted the landlord again about this issue until 4 September 2024. They said the landlord had said rewiring or disconnection would be too costly for the property owner and had instead offered £100 compensation. In its stage 1 response the landlord said it was normal practice for communal electricity to run from a resident’s meter in converted properties. They said the property owner had informed it they had paid £10 per month directly to the resident to cover the additional cost. The landlord has not provided any evidence of it contacting the property owner about this at this point. This is a record keeping failure.
14. In its response the landlord asked the resident to provide their electricity bills if they did not think the £10 payments were adequate. It was reasonable of the landlord to request these.
15. The resident disputed that the property owner had paid them £10 a month. They requested details of this. They also said the landlord did not notify them when the tenancy started that communal electricity would come from their meter. They said the property owner was withholding an electrical report requested by the local authority on 6 September 2024 which recommended the installation of a separate meter for communal electricity usage.
16. In its stage 2 response the landlord said it would speak to the property owner and request evidence of payments to the resident. It also said it would request a copy of the electrical safety certificate, and it had a requested a copy of the tenancy agreement to ascertain what it told the resident when he signed it, although this may not be available. The landlord said it would provide an update by 10 January 2025. This was over 2 months from the resident raising these concerns. This was an unreasonable delay. The landlord could have attempted to obtain this information before providing its stage 2 response. Additionally, the landlord did not update the resident as promised.
17. The landlord has not provided a copy of the resident’s tenancy agreement, so we have been unable to assess if it included information about communal electricity coming from the resident’s meter. This is a record keeping failure.
18. The landlord emailed the property owner on 23 December 2024 and 9 January 2025 requesting evidence of it sending the cheque for £200. On both occasions the property owner said it would look into this. Following contact from the resident on 12 January 2025 the landlord agreed to pay the £200 to the resident and claim it back from the property owner. It is unclear if the landlord has paid this. Additionally, the cheque for £200 was to cover the period March 2022 to December 2023. This was not the full period the property owner had previously agreed to cover costs from.
19. In its stage 2 response the landlord offered £100 compensation for trouble, inconvenience and upset. It did not set out how much of this was for its failures in handling the resident’s reports of issues with the electricity meter including allegations of electricity theft. We have attributed half of this figure to these failings.
20. After considering our remedies guidance this does not adequately reflect the distress and upset caused to the resident. The resident raised concerns with the landlord about affordability for the communal electricity payments and told it he felt ignored. Therefore, we have ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation and take action to put matters right.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the conduct of the property owner
Finding	Service failure

21. The resident reported verbal harassment and manipulation from the property owner to the landlord on 22 October 2024. In its stage 2 response the landlord said it would speak to the property owner about their conduct. It did not email the property owner until 9 January 2025. This was an unreasonable delay. The property owner responded the next day and said it would look into this.
22. The landlord agreed to contact the property owner. However, it delayed in doing so and did not follow this up. The resident told the landlord that the behaviour of the property owner had created a hostile and intimidating living environment. Therefore, we have made orders for the landlord to apologise for its failings and pay compensation to the resident in line with our remedies guidance for any distress or inconvenience caused by the delays.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint
Finding	Maladministration

23. The landlord’s complaint policy is compliant with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) published in April 2024. The resident said they were unhappy with the landlord’s actions in March and May 2023. However, the landlord did not raise a complaint. This was not in line with the Code in place at the time which said that a complaint was an expression of dissatisfaction however made. This was a missed opportunity for the landlord to address the resident’s concerns.
24. The resident complained again on 4 September 2024. However, there is no evidence the landlord acknowledged this. Its complaints policy said it would acknowledge a complaint at stage 1 within 5 working days and provide a response within 10 working days of acknowledgement. The landlord provided its stage 1 response 3 working days late.
25. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request in line with the timescales in its complaint procedure. The landlord requested an extension to provide its stage 2 response. While the landlord’s complaint policy allowed for it to extend the response time if it informed the resident, it should have done this before the complaint response was initially due. The landlord provided its stage 2 response 1 working day later than it said it would. This was an oversight.
26. The landlordoffered the resident £100 compensation. However, it is not clear if the landlord considered its complaint handling as part of the redress it offered. We have therefore attributed half of this to the landlord’s complaint handling failures identified in this report. However, this does not reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident due to the delay in it raising a complaint.We have ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation.

Learning

27. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint at stage 1, and its response included general information on the action it was taking to improve complaint handling. However, its stage 2 response was silent on any learning identified. The landlord missed an opportunity to identify learning points to address internally in its complaint responses.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

28. The landlord has not provided evidence of it contacting the property owner as indicated in its complaint responses or a copy of the tenancy agreement. At times this made it difficult for us to assess its actions.

Communication

29. The landlord did not keep the resident updated and was not proactive enough in contacting the property owner.