Clarion Housing Association Limited (202401327)

Background

1. The resident is unhappy with the landlord’s handling of concerns she raised. She said a member of its staff had been unprofessional on a call to discuss a different complaint.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Concerns about staff conduct.
   2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of concerns about staff conduct.
   2. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Concerns about staff conduct

4. The landlord appropriately investigated the resident’s concerns and gave explanations for its reasons. It recognised it should have provided more information in its stage 1 response and offered compensation to put things right.

The associated complaint

5. The landlord responded to the complaint in line with the Code and its policy.

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.

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.

6. We will not form a view on whether the staff members’ actions themselves were appropriate. Instead, our role is to decide whether the landlord adequately investigated and responded to the complaint, and took proportionate action based on the information available to it.
7. The landlord’s complaints policy states complaints about staff conduct will be addressed in line with its human resource policies. It will communicate relevant information about the outcome. However, it will not share personal data and employment related information due to its duties around staff confidentiality and data protection.
8. The resident called the landlord to discuss the complaint about the lift and heating repairs. We have not been provided a copy of the call recording. However, the landlord’s call notes record the call was terminated as the conversation was escalating into an argument.
9. Where a resident reports inappropriate behaviour from a member of the landlord’s staff, the landlord should carry out an appropriate investigation. It should take steps to verify the resident’s reports and take action if required. This would generally include conducting interviews and gathering evidence from all parties and making an informed decision based on its findings.
10. The landlord spoke to the resident on 17 January 2024 about the call and followed this up in an email. This was appropriate, as it allowed the landlord to gather evidence about the resident’s account. It also reviewed the call recording and shared its findings in the stage 2 response.
11. In its stage 2 response, the landlord explained it would report feedback surrounding the tone of the call. This was appropriate and demonstrated it had taken the resident’s concerns seriously.  And that it was implementing learning from the complaint. It is usual practice for the outcome of staff conduct investigations not to be shared. Therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord to advise the resident of this to manage her expectations
12. The resident requested that a different staff member take over the handling of her original stage 1 complaint which was issued on 14 February 2024, approximately one month prior to the incident. Given the landlord’s policy that it will respond to stage 1 complaints in 10 working days, it had sufficient time to reallocate the complaint to a different staff member. However, we also see that the landlord explained its reasoning for not reallocating the complaint. It appropriately explained that the stage 1 decision was also checked by various different teams internally to ensure it was impartial and fair. While we understand the resident’s concerns about this, the landlord’s overall response was reasonable.
13. We consider the landlord’s offer of £50 compensation to be fair and in line with our own compensation guidance for failings that have had an adverse impact on residents.

14. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) applicable from April 2022 was in use at the time. This sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The landlord had a published complaints policy which broadly aligned with the Code. It states it will respond to stage 1 complaints in 10 working days and to stage 2 complaints in 20 working days.
15. The landlord appropriately responded at stage 1 taking 8 working days to acknowledge and respond to the complaint. While its escalation acknowledgement was delayed, it did issue its final response within the prescribed 25 working days in accordance with the Code and its policy. As a result, we have found no maladministration.

Learning

16. It is positive that the landlord identified learning that it would feedback to relevant staff to improve its overall service standards.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

17. The landlord’s record keeping was good, and we have not identified any concerns.

Communication

18. The landlord’s communication was appropriate, and we have not identified any concerns.