Accent Housing Limited (202346152)

Decision
Case ID	202346152
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Accent Housing Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	29 April 2026

Background

1. The resident had been attempting to contact the landlord about moving to a new property. He raised concerns about the landlord’s communication with him, including it not returning his calls.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about its communication with him.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s response to his complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We made a finding of reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about its communication with him.
5. We made a finding of no maladministration in the landlord’s response to his complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord agreed it had failed to phone the resident back as agreed. It took learning from the complaint and shared this with its teams.
7. The landlord responded to both aspects of the resident’s complaint promptly and in full.

 

 

 

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
2 February 2024	The resident made a stage 1 complaint. He said he had phoned the landlord’s allocations team daily. He was unhappy that the landlord repeatedly gave him the same information and had not called him back.
13 February 2024	The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It agreed that its communication had been below its expected service standards. The landlord said it would provide feedback to the team member involved and had reminded all team members of the importance of responding to residents on time. The landlord said it would escalate the complaint as he had asked. The resident said he wanted the team members involved to be put on written warnings.
11 March 2024	The landlord sent its final complaint response and noted its communication failing again. It said that it would share lessons from the complaint with team leaders. It added that, going forward, team leaders would check that it had carried out all agreed call‑backs to residents. The landlord added that it could not share details of any warnings against its team members but confirmed that it would speak directly with them about the impact of their actions.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate as he was unhappy with the landlord’s final response. As an outcome he was seeking for the landlord to issue formal warnings to the team members involved.

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	The resident’s concerns about the landlord’s communication with him.
Finding	Reasonable redress

8. The resident told us that he wanted team members working for the landlord to be put on written warnings. It is not within our remit to reprimand staff of the landlord. However, we can consider how any staff conduct issues affected the resident and whether the landlord did enough to put right any errors for him. In this case the landlord addressed the resident’s concern with team members in its complaint response and agreed that the team members involved would receive feedback and training. This was reasonable action for it to take.
9. In its complaint responses, the landlord agreed that its quality of communication with the resident was below acceptable standards. The landlord said it would give feedback to teams to improve customer service in the future. The landlord acknowledged its error, apologised and took steps to reduce the risk of the issue recurring. This was a proportionate response which adequately addressed the specific call-back issue and showed a commitment to improvement.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	No maladministration

10. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) requires the landlord to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days of receipt. It should respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of the acknowledgement and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The landlord responded to both stages of the resident’s complaints within these timeframes.
11. In its responses the landlord acknowledged its failings, apologised and explained the learning it had taken from the complaint. This was an appropriate response which showed it took accountability and was committed to improving its service in the future.

Learning

Learning

12. The evidence suggests that the resident wanted to move to a new property because of his health conditions. When a resident reports that health conditions are affecting their housing needs, landlords should make prompt contact to understand their needs and consider whether any adjustments or additional support are needed.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

13. We did not find any issues with the landlord’s record keeping.

Communication

14. The landlord identified where its communication could be improved and took learning from the complaint.