Notting Hill Genesis (202411943)

Decision
Case ID	202411943
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Notting Hill Genesis
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	30 April 2026

Background

1. In March 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 response to the resident’s complaint about its communication, staff conduct and failure to provide information. Following this response the resident continued to experience issues with communication with the landlord. She then raised a further complaint about the landlord’s communication in April 2023.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Reports of poor communication.
   2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration by the landlord in relation to its handling of reports of poor communication.
4. There was reasonable redress offered by the landlord in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

5. Through its complaints process the landlord acknowledged there had been failings and delays with it responding to the residents communications about various issues. It offered appropriate compensation for this. However, the majority of the compensation was offered after the complaints process had ended. Therefore, the landlord did not do enough to put things right during its complaints process.
6. Through its complaints process the landlord acknowledged it had failed to follow its complaints policy and there were delays in it issuing its responses. In recognition of these failings it offered £70 reasonable compensation.

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 provided by a member of its management team. 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 28 May 2026
	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident the £335 compensation offered in its email of 27 October 2023. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 28 May 2026
	Learning Order The landlord must carry out a review of the communication failures and delays identified in this case through its complaints process. The review should identify what went wrong and what it will do differently in future to prevent similar failures being repeated. The review should include as a minimum: –       Its recommended response times to emails. –       How it ensures all emails are responded to within these recommended timescales. Following this review the landlord must provide this Service and the resident with a copy of its findings. This must also set out how it plans to address the identified failing to prevent them reoccurring in future.	No later than 28 May 2026
	Provide information If it has not already done so, the landlord must provide the resident with any outstanding information requested about service charges. As of 21 June 2024 this was understood to be: –       Information about the apportionment of service charges. –       A letter detailing the amended service charges. –       A letter detailing the amended charges for housing benefit.	No later than 28 May 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £70 compensation it offered for its complaint handling failures. Our reasonable redress determination is made on the basis that this amount is paid.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
23 April 2023	The resident raised her complaint. She said the complaint was about the landlord’s failure to provide information and acknowledge or respond to her communications within its policy timescales of 24 hours. She also provided a list of staff and emails which they had not responded to within a reasonable time or at all. She said the landlord had failed to keep her updated about delays to it responding to her communications. She said this was an ongoing issue she had been experiencing for some time but the landlord had not done anything to fix it despite previous complaints.
6 June 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It said there were no published responses times and it did not ask its staff to respond to emails within a specific timeframe. It also said there were no requirements for it to acknowledge emails within 24 hours. However, it said as a general rule it expected emails to be replied to within 5 working days, or less if the subject of the email is urgent. However, the landlord acknowledged its communication with the resident had fallen short of what it expected. It also acknowledged it had failed to acknowledge and respond to the complaint within its policy timescales. In recognition of its failings the landlord offered the resident a total of £300 compensation. It said this compensation was broken down as: –       £50 for the delays in issuing the stage 1 response. –       £50 for its failure to reply to her emails in December 2022 about repairs to communal lighting. –       £200 for its failure to reply to her email in December 2022 with queries about service charges. It confirmed it would respond to her outstanding queries about communal lighting and service charges. It also said it would arrange for it to respond to her emails once a week to ensure she received a reply within 5 working days.
3 July 2023	The resident escalated her complaint. In summary, she said she remained unhappy with the lack of clarification and consistency around response times from the landlord’s staff. She also said she remained unhappy with its failure to provide a response to a number of her emails.
31 July 2023	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It confirmed it had not reviewed its response to several matters, including the communal lighting and service charges. It said this was at the resident’s request. It said she had said she was discussing those matters with it and she wanted to be able to bring them as a separate complaint if they were not resolved. As such, it said it had removed the compensation previously offered for failing to adequately communicate with her about the lighting and service charges. It said this was so she could bring complaints about these in future if needed. The landlord confirmed the £50 compensation previously offered for its complaint handling failures. However, it also acknowledged there had been additional delays and inconvenience caused to the resident. In recognition of this it offered a further £30 compensation.
21 June 2024	The resident confirmed she wanted this Service to investigate the complaint. She said she remained unhappy with the landlord’s complaint responses and she continued to experience issues with communication. She also said she remained unhappy with the landlord’s failure to log and respond to her complaint within its complaints policy timescales. She said the landlord’s failures had negatively impacted her mental health. She said to resolve matters she wanted the landlord to: –       Offer more compensation for the damage caused to her. –       Provide the outstanding information she had requested and address the remaining issues. –       Ensure it follows its complaints policy and responds to communications. –       Have published response times. –       The staff involved to take accountability.

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	Communication
Finding	Maladministration

7. The landlord has confirmed it does not have published response times for responding to emails from residents. However, it has said it aims to acknowledge emails within 24 hours and then respond within 5 working days or sooner if the subject is urgent.
8. The resident’s correspondence refer to how the landlord’s handling of communication with her has impacted her mental health. We are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, any effect on health and wellbeing. Personal injury claims must, ultimately, be decided by the courts, as they can consider medical evidence and make legally binding findings. However, we can consider the general distress and inconvenience the situation may have caused the resident.
9. Furthermore, we may not investigate complaints which have not gone through the landlord’s complaints process. When referring her complaint to us, the resident referred to how the ongoing issues with the landlord had impacted her in 2024. Any events after the landlord’s stage 2 response have not gone through its complaints process. This means while we may refer to those events for context, we will not make orders related to the landlord’s actions after its final stage 2 response (31 July 2023) as part of this investigation.
10. Through its complaints process the landlord acknowledged there had been delays and failings with its responses to the resident’s emails. Therefore, the question before us is whether the landlord has provided sufficient remedy to recognise the impact of its failings and put things right in line with our dispute resolution principles, be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
11. In its stage 1 response the landlord addressed the emails the resident sent in December 2022 regarding communal lighting repairs and service charges. It confirmed it did not have published response times for emails but it aims to respond to emails within 5 working days unless they are urgent. It said it was not required to reply to her emails within 24 hours as the resident had said it should have done. It also explained why it had not responded to her email about a boiler survey and why it felt its responses to emails about various other topics were appropriate. It was reasonable for it to explain its stance on response times and set out why it felt there had not been a service failure with regard to these emails.
12. However, the landlord acknowledged it had not responded to the resident’s emails relating to communal lighting repairs. It apologised for this failing and offered the resident £50 compensation. Similarly, it acknowledged its response to her emails asking for information about service charges had been outstanding for a ‘considerable amount of time’. It said it recognised the distress and inconvenience its lack of response had caused and offered £200 compensation. It said it would provide the requested information about service charges within 10 working days of the stage 1 response.
13. It also said it would set aside 1 day a week to answer any emails received from the resident to ensure they were responded to within 5 working days. It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge these failings and to offer compensation in recognition of the impact on the resident. It was also reasonable for it to put in place a process to try and ensure it responded to her emails within 5 working days.
14. In its stage 2 response the landlord confirmed it spoke to the resident about her escalation request on 19 July 2023. It said during that call she said she did not want it to address its responses to the communal lighting and service charges under the escalation request. It said she confirmed she was discussing those issues with its staff and wanted to be able to bring them as a separate complaints should she remain dissatisfied. As such, the landlord said it had removed the £250 compensation offered for its failure to respond to her emails about those issues. It said this was done to ensure she had recourse to this via its complaints process in the future.
15. Evidence of what was said between the resident and the landlord during the call on 19 July 2023 has not been seen. However, we have not seen evidence she has disputed she asked it not to consider its responses to the communal lighting and service charges under the escalation request. Based on the information seen, it was reasonable for the landlord to remove the compensation previously offered for these issues. By doing so the landlord maintained the resident’s ability to bring these issues as new complaints in future if she wanted to.
16. However, we are aware that following the stage 2 response the resident remained in contact with the landlord about the outstanding issues and its communication. On 26 October 2023 the resident emailed the landlord and set out why she disagreed with its complaint responses. She said:
    1. She did not feel the landlord had addressed all her complaint points.
    2. It had removed the compensation.
    3. She had been given contradictory information about acknowledgement and response times.
    4. The landlord’s staff had not taken accountability for the issues she had experienced.
17. The landlord responded to this email on 27 October 2023 and addressed the concerns raised in the resident’s email. It confirmed its previous findings of service failure with regard to responding to her communications about communal lighting repairs and service charges remained unchanged. It also said it agreed with some of the specific instances of poor communication the resident raised in her email. In recognition of these failings the landlord apologised and offered, or reoffered, the following compensation:
    1. £50 for its failure to reply to her emails in December 2022 about repairs to the communal lighting.
    2. £200 for its failure to reply to her email in December 2022 about service charges.
    3. £25 for failing to return a call.
    4. £25 for the data protection team not responding to her.
    5. £25 for the inconvenience caused by me removing the compensation that was initially offered in its complaint responses.

This brought the total compensation offered for the resident’s complaint about communication to £335.

18. In terms of remedy, in cases like this, compensation of around £335 would be considered appropriate. This amount is in line with our published compensation guidance for failings which adversely affected a resident but the landlord acknowledged this and tried to put things right. While the total amount offered by the landlord is in line with that, it offered this a considerable time after the complaints process was exhausted. This indicates the landlord did not take the opportunity of the complaint process to properly investigate the circumstances of the complaint and make a suitable offer of redress as soon as it could.
19. Therefore, a finding of reasonable redress would not be appropriate. Instead we have made a finding of maladministration. As such, we order the landlord to apologise for the failings identified in this report and, if it has not already done so, pay the compensation offered in its email of 27 October 2023.
20. Furthermore, the evidence seen indicates the communication issues experienced by the resident have been ongoing for some time and have been the subject of more than 1 complaint. We are aware that some of these complaints have been upheld in the resident’s favour. Despite this, the resident has continued to report issues with the level of communication from the landlord. Our dispute resolution principles state that when resolving complaints landlords have to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. However, the evidence seen indicates the landlord has not made sufficient improvements to prevent similar failings occurring in future.
21. In view of this, we order the landlord to review the communication failures and delays identified through this complaint. This review must identify learning opportunities regarding oversight of its communications procedures and recommended timescales.
22. On 21 June 2024 the resident told us the landlord had still not provided all the information she had asked for about service charges. She said it had not addressed her questions about apportionment, she had not received a letter detailing the amended service charges or a letter detailing the amended charges for housing benefit. If the landlord has not already done so, we order it to provide the resident with this information.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

23. The landlord’s complaints policy (August 2022) says it will acknowledge a stage 1 complaint within 2 working days and issue its stage 1 response within 10 working days of its acknowledgement. It also says the landlord will acknowledge a stage 2 complaint within 2 working days and issue its stage 2 response within 20 working days of its acknowledgement. The policy says that should more time be needed at either stage, the landlord will explain this to the resident and inform them of the expected timescale for its response. This is in line with our Complaint handling code (the Code), which sets out our expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices.
24. The resident raised her complaint on 23 April 2023. Evidence has not been seen to show when or if the landlord acknowledged the complaint and it issued its stage 1 response on 6 June 2023. This was not in line with its complaints policy timescales.
25. In its stage 1 response the landlord acknowledged it had failed to follow its complaints policy timescales. In recognition of this and the impact on the resident it offered £50 compensation. It was reasonable for the landlord to acknowledge this failing and offer compensation.
26. The resident escalated the complaint on 3 July 2023. Evidence has not been seen to show when or if the landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation of the complaint. However, it issued its stage 2 response on 31 July 2023. This was in line with its complaints policy timescales.
27. In its stage 2 response the landlord apologised that it had not explained the role of the agent the resident had previously communicated with sooner. It said they were a business service manager and were unable to log her complaint. It apologised for the further delay this had caused and increased the compensation offered by £30, bringing the total to £70.
28. Overall, we find the total amount of £70 offered for the landlord’s complaint handling failures is proportionate to the circumstances of the case. This is because it is in line with our published compensation guidance for failings which did not impact the outcome of the complaint or have a lasting impact on the resident. Therefore, we have made a finding of reasonable redress.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

29. The landlord’s records were accurate and comprehensive enough to allow us to carry out our investigation.

Communication

30. The landlord must ensure it acknowledges and responds to resident emails within a reasonable timeframe. It must also ensure it has systems and processes in place to ensure this happens even if staff are off for leave or illness.

Complaint handling

31. The landlord must ensure its complaint responses are issued within its complaints policy timescales. It must also ensure that it communicates with the resident if it needs more time to issue its response.