A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202412130)

Background

1. The resident moved to the property in September 2015. He pays a monthly variable service charge based on an annual estimate. The landlord reconciles the actual charges at year-end (31 March) and charges the resident for any deficit. The resident has queried service charges since 2019 and is dissatisfied with the landlord’s responses.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of:
   1. Enquiries about service charges.
   2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the service charge enquiries. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
4. The landlord provided reasonable redress for its handling of the associated complaint.

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord has not provided adequate summaries of service charges that correlate to the actual service charge demand periods. It delayed providing an adequate breakdown of service charge arrears.
6. The landlord provided reasonable remedy for its minor complaint handling failures.

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.

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 has expressed concern about the calculation, accuracy, reasonableness and increase of service charges. However, these issues do not fall within our remit and would be for the First-Tier Tribunal (FTT) to determine. The resident told us he is aware of the process and should consider disputing any concerns of this nature through that route.
8. There are limited records from 2019, which is understandable due to the passage of time. However, the landlord has provided sufficient information to allow us to assess the complaint from that date.
9. The landlord’s service charge policy says it aims to provide details of actual service charges (following the initial estimate) by the end of November in the following financial year. Further, section 21 of the Landlord and Tenant act 1985 gives the resident the right to request a summary of the costs that make up the service charges. This allows residents to verify the fairness of any charges the landlord has asked them to pay. It should show how the costs relate to any service charge demand.
10. For context, records show the resident asked for a summary of charges following a service charge demand of £561 on 31 October 2018 (after the end of year accounts had been reconciled). In 2022, he said he received another demand for £7,358.19 which came as a shock and again asked for the associated summary of charges. The landlord replied at that time. It explained arrears were due to annual service charge deficits covering several years (after actual costs were reconciled). It said the resident disputed the costs each year and it had previously withheld arrears during any dispute period to avoid rent accounts going into deficit.
11. It is positive the landlord later acknowledged it had failed to provide sufficient summaries of costs since 2019 in its stage 1 response, and agreed to do so by 17 June 2024. However, there is no evidence it then provided this information, resulting in the resident escalating his complaint.
12. While the landlord provided certified accounts from 2019 with its stage 2 response, the accounting periods (1 January to 31 December) did not correlate with the service charge demand period (1 April to 31 March). We understand the resident’s frustration about this and his concerns that information is difficult to reconcile in this format. The landlord had a duty under section 21 of the Landlord and Tenant act 1985 to make it clear how the information related to the service charge demand and it did not do so in this case, which amounts to maladministration.
13. Further, there was no breakdown of overall charges for items such as repairs and maintenance. Also, the figures did not show how much the resident was liable to pay. While the landlord provided information showing how much it was charged by the MA, with an accompanying explanation as to how the resident’s share was calculated, it was not very clear. We understand why the resident was not satisfied and agree it did not provide sufficient detail to assure him that the charges were fair.
14. We therefore order the landlord to provide a summary of costs that align to each period of service charge demand from 2019 to 2024. The resident can ask the landlord to inspect the accounts, including any invoices, receipts and contracts, in line with section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The landlord must facilitate this within one month of any such request from the resident.
15. It is positive the landlord addressed the resident’s complaint about the management of service charges. While the resident’s stage 1 and 2 complaints did not detail the specific service/s he was unhappy about, the landlord confirmed it had carried out a site visit. It said it intended to challenge some of the maintenance charges with the MA. It also invited the resident to pursue any further disputed costs after he had considered the summaries provided. However, the landlord’s failure to provide adequate summaries of the service charges impacted the resident’s ability to do so.
16. The landlord did respond to the resident’s request for a breakdown of service charge arrears. However, while it provided a statement of his rent account from 2015, this only showed a combined figure of rent and service charges. It was not clear what proportion of any debit or credit was for service charges. It is positive it went on to provide a clear breakdown on 21 July 2025, but it should have done so sooner.
17. The landlord’s compensation policy says it can award compensation of between £350 and £750 when a resident has experienced extensive disruption or effort. Its compensation award was within this range, which shows it took the resident’s complaint seriously. It acknowledged the impact of its failures over a prolonged period. However, the landlord has not acknowledged the further failures identified in this report. It has missed an opportunity to put things right in line with our dispute resolution principles.
18. We order the landlord to apologise and pay compensation of £500 (inclusive of the £390 already awarded). This is to recognise the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its failure to provide an adequate summary of service charges, in addition to the delay providing a detailed explanation of service charge arrears. It also recognises that the resident’s inability to ascertain whether charges were fair would impact his ability to pursue concerns via the FTT.
19. It is in line with our remedies guidance for failures that have an adverse effect on the resident and the landlord’s attempt to put things right is not proportionate to the failings identified in our investigation.

20. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint procedure. It aims to acknowledge all complaints within 5 working days and issue a stage 1 response in 10 working days and stage 2 response in 20 working days (in line with our complaint handling code (the Code)).
21. The landlord issued an automatic response to the stage 1 complaint. It told the resident it hoped to reply in 10 working days. It replied 7 working days outside this timeframe but apologised for this in its stage 1 response.
22. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 escalation within 3 working days. It told the resident to expect a reply by 17 July 2024. It later updated him to say it could not meet the deadline and hoped to reply by 30 July 2024. This was in line with the Code. This says landlords can extend the response period by up to 20 working days. While the landlord responded one day after it told the resident to expect a reply, it apologised for its complaint handling and awarded £35 compensation for this. This was reasonable redress for the minor failings that did not cause significant detriment.

Learning

23. The resident remains dissatisfied, despite the landlord providing information that spanned several years. He feels the information provided was not in a user-friendly format. Our insight report into service charges explains that landlords should consider whether service charge information is in clear and simple language. It says an ordinary person, with no specialist service charge knowledge, should be able to understand it. The landlord may have avoided failures if it had followed this advice and clarified what information the resident wanted.