Haringey London Borough Council (202343421)

Background

1. The resident has been a tenant of the landlord at 4 different properties since 2004. We have referred to these as properties A, B, C, and D in the report. The resident made a payment arrangement for rent arrears. She then raised a complaint about an added arrears balance of over £1,000.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about its calculation of arrears.
   2. The landlord’s handling of the complaint

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about its calculation of arrears.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord responded to the resident’s requests related to account statements. However, it did not specify how it calculated the arrears increase of £1,012.17 within its responses. It also did not provide clear information related to the water rates account balance. This was likely to cause confusion and add to the resident’s frustration.
5. There were some short delays in the landlord’s handling of the complaint. It did not show that it updated the resident on the status of the complaint, or when it would respond.

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.

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 tenancy agreement sets out the rent the resident is responsible for paying. Its website confirms that tenants are generally responsible for paying arrears for any former tenancies. The landlord’s policies do not set out a timescale for responding to arrears queries, but this should generally be within a reasonable timeframe of around 10 working days. It should inform the resident if it needs an extended period. The landlord would generally be expected to provide clear information about how arrears are calculated.
7. The resident made an arrangement to pay off arrears amounting to £5,895.11 on 30 October 2023 after receiving a Notice of Seeking Possession. However, in its communication with her about the arrangement on 30 October 2023, it referenced the arrears figure as £6,907.28, an increase of £1,012.17.
8. In the landlord’s information submission to us, it explained that it separated the weekly water rates from the rental charge for property D by creating a sub account in 2016. It provided us with a water rates account statement detailing charges between April 2016 and March 2019. The remaining balance as of April 2021 was £875.04.
9. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord confirmed that there was a water rates account associated with the address which started on 2 April 2016. However, it did not reference the specific amount owed (£875.04) in its communication at any stage. The resident’s rent account statement shows that the arrears for property D were £6.032.24 on 28 October 2023 due to a further weekly charge. This, alongside the water debt of £875.04 amounts to £6907.28. It would have been appropriate for it to have explained how the increase of £1,012.17 was calculated at the time. It was a failing that the landlord did not clearly explain this.
10. The landlord acted reasonably by providing the majority of the resident’s rent account statements on 14 December 2023. This was within a reasonable timescale following her request on 4 December 2024. However, it specified that between April 2016 and March 2019 there was “no water rate” charged for property D. This was likely to add to her confusion about the unknown water rates debt. She requested specific evidence showing the water account debt on the same day. However, there is no evidence to show it provided the water rate account statement to her.
11. The resident has explained that the landlord did not make her aware of a separate water rate account or debt prior to 30 October 2023. Its communication records show that she made a repayment arrangement, which included the separate water rates figure in October 2019. She made payments toward the account to clear some of the arrears in September and October 2019, showing that she was aware at the time. However, the landlord accepted it did not highlight all relevant accounts with arrears when setting up her payment arrangement and had not sent her arrears letters relating to these. It acted fairly by apologising.
12. The resident also provided a screenshot of her water account with the water company as part of her complaint. This detailed a “transferred balance” charge of £207.84 on 11 March 2019. She explained that the water company told her that this balance was transferred from the landlord. It acted reasonably by clarifying that it had not transferred earlier water rate arrears to the water company.
13. The resident was responsible for paying charges to the water company directly from March 2019. The water company did not apply another charge to her account until February 2020. This related to her payment for the 2020/21 financial year. It is reasonable to conclude that the £207.84 charge relates to the water payment due for the 2019/20 financial year. It was reasonable for the landlord to refer the resident back to the water company for clarification.
14. In its communication with us, the landlord has explained that it did not enforce any outstanding water debts due to the outcome of a high court ruling involving another council. It recognised that it caused the resident confusion. It said it should have not shared the higher arrears figure. It was not actively seeking to recover the separate water rates debt at the time as its priority was the rent arrears. It clarified that the payment plan would only be used for the rent arrears while it made decisions about the water rates. It was a failing that it did not clearly explain this at the time of the complaint.
15. We have found service failure by the landlord in its response to the resident’s concerns about its calculation of arrears. It did not explain how it calculated the increase of £1,012.17. It did not provide all relevant information at the time of the complaint which was likely to add to her confusion. We have ordered the landlord to write to the resident to set out its current position. We have also ordered it to pay the resident £100 compensation to reflect her time and trouble pursuing a resolution. This is amount is in line with our remedies guidance for instances of service failure.

16. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2022 edition. The landlord’s complaints policy complied with the timescales set out in the Code at the time.
17. The landlord took 14 working days to respond to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 between 6 and 24 November 2023. This was slightly outside of its 12-working day timescale to acknowledge, then respond to the complaint. We note that the resident needed to chase an outcome as it had not informed her when she could expect to receive a response. It acted reasonably by apologising for the delay at stage 1.
18. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 14 December 2023. The landlord took 25 working days to respond and sent its stage 2 response on 23 January 2024. This was outside of its 20-working day timescale to respond at the time. This was a relatively short timescale and unlikely to cause significant inconvenience. However, we have not seen evidence to show it communicated effectively or managed the resident’s expectations as to when it would respond, which was likely to be frustrating.
19. As part of our consideration of the landlord’s complaint handling, we have also considered the adequacy of its responses. The resident provided a screenshot of an arrears summary from April 2021 in her escalation request. This showed arrears for her current and former rent accounts. It also listed the current and former water rate accounts, but there was no balance shown next to these entries.
20. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord included the same screenshot and said it did not find that the letter stated that she did not have arrears for water rates. The landlord’s response was likely to add to the resident’s confusion and frustration. It also missed an opportunity to explain that it had a sub-account for water rates and provide evidence of the balance she owed. The landlord did not fully respond to her complaint.
21. We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We have ordered the landlord to pay £50 in recognition of the delays and time and trouble she spent pursuing her complaint.

Learning 

22. The landlord would benefit from taking learning from this case in how it manages rent arrears and keeps track of payments. Where there are separate water figures that it may seek to recover in future, it would benefit from communicating this clearly to residents.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. The landlord did not provide relevant records or details of how it calculated arrears to the resident at the time of the complaint and these were not evidence in its records. It should ensure it has suitable systems in place so that staff can access relevant information, and are able to answer more complex enquiries regarding rent arrears.

Communication

24. There is no evidence to show that the landlord kept the resident updated on how it was handling the complaint or when it would provide a response. The landlord would benefit from learning from this to avoid similar failings in future.