Clarion Housing Association Limited (202344571)

Background

1. The resident lives in a house with a garden. When the resident moved into the property in 2016 she raised concerns about the condition of the trees in the garden.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the maintenance of trees in her garden.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found that there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s concerns about the maintenance of trees in her garden.
   2. The complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

5. When made aware of the resident’s concerns about the maintenance of trees the landlord took appropriate steps in line with its policy. There were delays to the work carried out by the landlord, but it has provided appropriate compensation to the resident.
6. The landlord did not handle the resident’s complaint in line with its policy but provided appropriate redress for this as part of its response to the resident’s complaint.

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.

7. The resident’s tenancy agreement says that it is the resident’s responsibility to maintain trees and hedges, and to make sure they are kept in a reasonable condition and to a reasonable height.
8. The landlord’s tree management procedure confirms this approach and explains that when a tenant moves into a property the trees should be in a manageable condition for them. The procedure also sets out that if a resident is vulnerable or otherwise unable to carry out maintenance of trees it may be appropriate for the landlord to consider assisting with this as a one off.
9. The resident has told us that she asked for the height of the trees to be reduced when she first moved into the property in 2016. We have not seen evidence of this, but we have seen that in 2017 and 2018 there were conversations between the resident and members of staff at the landlord about the trees. Following this the landlord authorised its contractor to carry out some work on the trees. This was in line with its policy as a one off event.
10. The landlord should have ensured that the trees were manageable and in an acceptable condition when the resident moved into the property. Its tree management procedure says that the condition of trees and bushes should be documented. We have not seen any evidence that the landlord did this, this is a failure.
11. The landlord has itself acknowledged that it was difficult for it to find evidence about what had taken place at the time the resident moved into the property due to the historical nature of the events. The landlord could not identify what had been agreed with the resident and when.  It has not provided evidence about the condition of the trees at the time the resident moved into the property, but nor has it disputed the resident’s version of events. This points to a record keeping failure.
12. The landlord has accepted in its complaint responses that it took too long to carry out the work on the trees. It apologised for this and provided substantial compensation as part of its stage 2 response. The landlord offered compensation of £750 for the delays. This is in line with a failure in the landlord’s compensation policy where there was a significant long term effect on the resident.
13. While the landlord did not follow the process outlined in its tree management procedure, it has taken appropriate steps to resolve the failings earlier in the tenancy. It has provided appropriate redress for this failure and has explained why it is not required to carry out any further works. It does not need to do anything more to put things right.

14. The landlord’s complaints policy says that complaints will be acknowledged within 10 working days at both stages of the complaints process. It says that a response will be provided within 20 working days at stage 1 and within 40 working days at stage 2.
15. The resident raised her complaint on 11 October 2023. There is no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the complaint, but it provided a response at stage 1 on 10 November 2023. This was after 23 days and slightly outside of its policy timescale.
16. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 13 November 2023. There was no acknowledgement of the complaint at this stage. It provided a stage 2 response on 22 December 2023. This was after 30 working days, and within the timescale given in its policy.
17. The landlord offered £50 for the delay in providing a response at stage 1 and an additional £50 for the delay in providing a response at stage 2. It is not clear why the landlord offered £50 for delays at stage 2.
18. The amounts offered for the failings in complaint handling are in line with a service failure that will have had some impact on the resident in the landlord’s compensation policy. Given the limited impact that these delays are likely to have had on the resident, these payments are appropriate to remedy the failures in the complaint handling.

Learning

19. The landlord did not follow its tree management procedure at the time the resident moved into the property. It should have ensured the trees were manageable and have kept evidence about the condition they were in. It should ensure it follows all relevant policies and procedures in future.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

20. The landlord did not have clear records from the time the resident moved into the property and as a result could not identify what it had agreed to, or what had taken place. It should ensure it keeps better records about the condition of available properties and the actions it agrees to take.

Communication

21. The landlord did not appropriately communicate with the resident throughout its complaints process. It did not properly acknowledge the complaint at either stage or keep the resident updated about the progress of her complaint.