Hightown Housing Association Limited (202343764)

Background

1. The resident moved out of the property in November 2021 and asked the landlord to remove her name from the joint tenancy. When it did not do so, she raised a complaint.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s request to remove her name from the joint tenancy.
   2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s request to remove her name from the joint tenancy.
   2. The complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord acted in line with the tenancy agreement and its procedure when handling the resident’s request to remove their name from the joint tenancy.
5. The landlord acted in line with its policies in its handling of the complaint.

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.

6. The landlord’s tenancy changes procedure states that to change a joint tenancy to a sole tenancy the rent account must be clear, unless a court order is granted. This aligned with the resident’s tenancy agreement.
7. The resident told the landlord in November 2021 that she had moved out of the property and asked for her name to be removed from the joint tenancy. The landlord advised her that her name could not be removed while there were arrears on the account, and that she remained liable for both ongoing rent and arrears. The evidence confirmed there were arrears on the account at the time. This was an appropriate response from the landlord and in line with its tenancy changes procedure.
8. The landlord continued to notify the resident of rent arrears throughout December 2021, 2022, and 2023. The evidence showed that it provided appropriate guidance, including suggesting mediation and advising her to seek independent legal advice.It consistently reiteratedthat her name could not be removed while there were arrears on the tenancy. This was reasonable and in line with itsprocedure.
9. In both its stage 1 and stage 2 responses, the landlord said it could not remove the resident’s name from the tenancy while rent arrears remained, unless a court order was obtained. It also clearly outlined its legal position and explained why it was required to continue corresponding with the resident regarding the enforcement action being taken on the tenancy. This further demonstrated clear communication about the circumstances and the landlord’s position.
10. Overall, the landlord handled the resident’srequest to remove her name from the joint tenancy in line with the tenancy agreement and its procedure. It gave accurate and consistent advice to her throughout the process.

11. The landlord had a 2-stage complaint process. It aimed to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days, issue a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1, and within 20 working days at stage 2. Its definition of a complaint and its response timescales were compliant with the Complaint Handling Code.
12. The landlord responded at both stages in line with its complaints policy. Its responses were clear and set out its position in response to the resident’s complaint.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

13. The landlord provided sufficient records to assist with the investigation of this complaint.

Communication

14. The landlord’s communication was consistent throughout the process. It showed that it responded appropriately and promptly.