Clarion Housing Association Limited (202341727)

Decision
Case ID	202341727
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Clarion Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	25 June 2026

Background

1. The resident submitted a tenancy termination form to end her tenancy. She complained that, despite the landlord acknowledging receipt of the form, it later said it had not received it and delayed in providing her with a tenancy end date. When the tenancy ended, she requested a refund of the credit on her rent account. She said the landlord did not process her request promptly and the delay had a significant impact on her as she was a single parent on a low income.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of:
   1. the tenancy termination process
   2. the resident’s request for a credit refund
   3. the complaint

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. service failure in the landlord’s handling of the tenancy termination process
   2. reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a credit refund
   3. reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint

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

Summary of reasons

The tenancy termination process

4. There were inadequacies in the landlord’s information management. As a result, it told the resident that it had not received her termination from and could not confirm her tenancy end date, despite it acknowledging that it had received the document. As a result, the resident had to invest avoidable time in chasing for information. The landlord failed to fit a key safe for the resident to return her keys at the end of the tenancy. However, the resident did not chase this until after the end of the tenancy. The landlord did not acknowledge the issues in its handling of the tenancy termination or offer any redress.

The resident’s request for a credit refund

5. The landlord acknowledged that it did not process the resident’s request for a credit refund within a reasonable timeframe and the impact the delays had on her. It identified a gap in its processes and implemented improvements because of its findings. It also offered redress which was proportionate to the distress and inconvenience caused.

Handling of the complaint

6. While there were delays in the landlord’s handling of the complaint, it acknowledged and apologised for these and offered proportionate redress.

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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. it has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 23 July 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the tenancy termination process. 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 23 July 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
Compensation If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £300 compensation offered in its final complaint response. The finding of reasonable redress is made on the basis that this is paid.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
11 September 2023	The resident said she wanted to raise a formal complaint about the landlord’s handling of the tenancy termination (complaint 1). She said she had returned the tenancy termination form and that the landlord confirmed receipt. However, she said it then told her it had not received her form.
12 September 2023	The landlord told the resident it had passed her enquiry to the relevant team and that she could raise a formal complaint if the issue was not resolved.
17 October 2023	The resident said she had not yet received a refund of the credit that was on her rent account at the end of her tenancy. She asked the landlord to investigate the matter (complaint 2).
13 November to 12 December 2023	The resident asked the landlord 3 times to respond to her complaint.
9 January 2024	Following communication from the resident, we asked the landlord to respond to her complaint.
16 January 2024	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said it had managed the tenancy termination process in line with its policy. The landlord acknowledged the resident had contacted it several times and that it had not followed its credit refund process. It also acknowledged it had not raised a formal complaint when it should have done so. The landlord offered the resident £150 compensation: £50 for the complaint handling delay and £100 for its handling of her credit refund request. It said it had reviewed its credit refund process to ensure it processed credit refunds immediately.
16 January 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She said the compensation offered did not reflect the seriousness of the delays.
25 January 2024	The resident said she had made 2 separate complaints, 1 about its handling of the tenancy termination, and another about the credit refund. She asked the landlord to deal with the complaints separately.
31 January 2024	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate complaint 2 to stage 2.
7 February 2024	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate complaint 1 to stage 2.
16 February 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response to complaint 1. It said it had dealt with the resident’s complaints together as she raised them at around the same time and they concerned the same issues. The landlord said it managed the termination process in line with its policy, process, and service level agreements.
22 February 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response to complaint 2. It reiterated the findings of its stage 1 complaint investigation. The landlord apologised that its delay in processing her refund had a significant impact on the resident as she was a “single, low-income parent”. It increased its offer of compensation to £300: £150 awarded at stage 1, £50 for the delay in providing its stage 2 response, and a further £100 for the impact of the delay in processing her credit refund request.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident brought her case to us as she was not satisfied that the compensation offered by the landlord was proportionate.

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 tenancy termination process
Finding	Service failure

7. The resident submitted a completed tenancy termination form on 3 September 2023. The landlord acknowledged receipt of the form 2 days later and said it had passed it on to the appropriate team which would contact her.
8. In September 2023 the landlord asked the resident if she still wished to end her tenancy. It said her 4-weeks’ notice period would not start until she returned the form. It is not clear why it sent this communication as it had already acknowledged receipt of the form. This indicates issues in its record keeping.
9. Around a week later the resident asked the landlord to confirm the last day of her tenancy. It said it could not confirm her tenancy end date as she had not returned her termination form. Again, it is unclear why it said this as it had confirmed receipt of the completed form.
10. The resident asked the landlord again on 13 September 2023 to confirm her tenancy end date. It told her it had “only just” received her termination form and would be in touch to confirm the end date. The resident asked the landlord on several further occasions over the following week to confirm her tenancy end date. It said its system had not yet been updated and asked her to be “patient”.
11. We acknowledge that the landlord had an administrative process to follow. However, its communication could have been more empathetic as the resident needed to confirm her tenancy end date to progress her plans to move.
12. On 18 September 2023 the landlord told the resident her tenancy would end on 1 October 2023. It said it would fit a key safe to the property for her to leave the keys in when she moved out and said she should get in touch if it did not fit a key safe 1 week before the tenancy end date.
13. The tenancy ended on 1 October 2023. The next day, the resident told the landlord she had moved out but no key safe had been installed. The landlord did not fit a key safe as it said it would. However, the resident did not contact it as requested before the tenancy end date to make it aware of this. This did not result in the landlord charging the resident additional rent. Therefore, there was no detriment caused beyond the inconvenience of her having to ask how to return the keys.
14. The day after the tenancy ended, the resident asked the landlord why it had charged her a further weeks’ rent. It responded on the same day and explained that this happened automatically and the account would be adjusted when it was closed. This was a reasonable and prompt response.
15. Within its complaint responses the landlord said it had adhered to its policy, process, and service level agreements in relation to its handling of the tenancy termination. However, it has not provided us with copies of these documents and we have been unable to assess its handling of the termination against these standards. Therefore, we have considered whether its actions were reasonable and appropriate.
16. There were failings in the landlord’s record keeping and communication. This caused the resident avoidable distress and inconvenience. The landlord did not acknowledge these failings in its complaint responses or offer redress. Our compensation guidance suggests that compensation of up to £100 is appropriate where there was a failure by the landlord in the service it provided and it did not appropriately acknowledge this or put it right. We consider that £100 is proportionate to the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident in this case.

Complaint	Request for a credit refund
Finding	Reasonable redress

17. The resident returned her completed tenancy termination form to the landlord on 3 September 2023.
18. The termination form asks the resident to provide their new address and says the landlord will use this information to refund any money owed at the end of the tenancy. There is no information on the termination form that indicates that a resident must request a refund. Therefore, resident’s may have understood it would process a refund automatically.
19. On 17 October 2023 the resident told the landlord she had not received a refund for the credit on her rent account. The landlord responded 3 days later and said it would pass her enquiry to its accounts team. However, it took no action to process the refund at that time.
20. The resident requested a credit refund again on several occasions between 23 October 2023 and 12 December 2023. The landlord said it had passed the matter to its accounts team. However, it did not process the refund.
21. After we contacted the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint, it obtained her bank details and agreed to pay the refund within 3 working days. In total it took the landlord over 3 months to process the refund after the end of the tenancy.
22. The credit on the account amounted to almost £700. The resident explained to the landlord that she was a single parent and on a low income. She said that not having access to this money caused her financial difficulty.
23. In its complaint responses the landlord acknowledged that it had not actioned the resident’s requests for a credit refund. It said it had found a gap in its termination process and made changes to ensure it processed refunds immediately.
24. The landlord acknowledged the impact that the delay had on the resident and that she had been particularly impacted due to the fact she was a single parent on a low income. It offered her £200 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the credit refund.
25. The landlord’s offer of compensation was within the range of awards set out in our compensation guidance when there has been a failing which adversely affected the resident. This, along with its apology and identified learning was proportionate and in line with our dispute resolution principles.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

26. At the time of the complaint, the landlord was operating an interim complaints policy due to a cyber incident. The policy extended its usual response timescales from 10-working days to 20-working days for stage 1 complaints. It extended its response timescales for stage 2 complaints from 20-working days to 40-working days.
27. The Code and the landlord’s complaints policy define a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction.
28. The resident’s email in September 2023 clearly stated she wanted to raise a formal complaint about the landlord’s handling of her tenancy termination. Her email in October 2023 was also clear that she was unhappy with its handling of her credit refund request and that she wanted it to investigate and pay compensation.
29. The resident then asked the landlord for a response to her complaintsseveral times. However, it failed to raise a complaint until we asked it to do so in January 2024. As a result the resident had to invest avoidable time and trouble to obtain a response.
30. The Code and the landlord’s policy require it to acknowledge receipt of the resident’s stage 1 response within 5-working days. It failed to acknowledge the stage 1 complaint in this case.
31. The landlord acknowledged its delay in logging the stage 1 complaint within its stage 1 response, apologised, and offered £50 compensation. This was proportionate and broadly in line with our compensation guidance.
32. It took the landlord 9-working days to acknowledge the resident’s stage 2 escalation of complaint 1. This is outside the 5-working day timeframe in the Code and the 10-working day timeframe in the landlord’s interim complaints policy. However, it apologised for this delay in its acknowledgement. It provided its stage 2 response 7-working days after acknowledging the complaint. This was within the 20-working day timeframe in the Code.
33. In its final response to complaint 1 the landlord said it had combined the complaints as the resident raised them at around the same time and they concerned the “same issues”.
34. The Code states that if a resident raises additional complaints during the investigation, these must be incorporated into the stage 1 response if they are related and the stage 1 response has not been issued. Therefore, it was appropriate that the landlord combined the complaints. However, it was also reasonable that it issued separate stage 2 responses as this demonstrated it considered the resident’s request.
35. It took the landlord 11-working days to acknowledge the resident’s stage 2 escalation of complaint 2. This is outside the 5-working day timeframe in the Code and the 10-working day timeframe in the landlord’s interim complaints policy. It provided its stage 2 response 16-working days after acknowledging the complaint. This was within the 20-working day timeframe in the Code.
36. The landlord acknowledged the delay in acknowledging the resident’s escalation of complaint 2 within its final response and offered £50 compensation. This was proportionate and in line with our compensation guidance.
37. In total, the landlord offered the resident £100 compensation for complaint handling failures. This is within the range of awards set out in our compensation guidance and, along with its apology, was proportionate and in line with our dispute resolution principles.

Learning

38. Landlords should have effective systems in place to ensure they respond appropriately and in a timely manner to residents’ requests, including those relating to rent account credits and refunds, to prevent avoidable delays and repeated contact. Where a landlord identifies a service failure it is important that, as in this case, it takes learning forward by reviewing its processes and taking steps to improve service delivery and prevent recurrence.

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

39. Landlords should maintain clear, accurate, and contemporaneous records of resident contact, requests, and account activity, to ensure that actions are progressed and can be effectively monitored.

Communication

40. Landlords should provide timely and relevant updates to residents about the progress of their requests, including any actions being taken in relation to rent account queries or refunds. This can help to manage expectations and maintain trust.