London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202345131)

Background

1. The resident queried an increase in her service charges in November 2023. She raised a complaint in February 2024 and said it had not responded to her service charge query.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Query about her service charge.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Query about her service charge.
   2. Complaint.

Summary of reasons

Response to the resident’s service charge query

4. The landlord delayed responding to the resident’s service charge query. It replied at stage 1 and 2 of its complaint process with service charge information and signposted her to further support. It recognised its delay and offered compensation to try and put things right for her.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord did not comply with its complaints policy. It acknowledged this and offered compensation which was sufficient to put right the impact on the resident.

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.

What we did not investigate

6. We do not investigate complaints where it would be quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the court, tribunal or other procedure. In this case, the complaint about the increase in service charge costs is better dealt with by the FTT service because they are specialists in the field of leasehold and shared owner service charges. For these reasons, we have decided not to investigate the complaint about the increase in service charge costs.

What we did investigate

7. On 29 November 2023, the resident raised a service charge query with her landlord, but it did not respond. She complained on 22 February 2024 and said she had waited 3 months for a reply.
8. On 8 May 2024, the landlord replied at stage 1. It apologised for the delay and responded to the resident’s query. It asked her to send all future queries to its service charge email. It offered £60 compensation for her time and effort in getting the complaint resolved. The landlord’s policy says it will award discretionary compensation when its mistake or failure causes a resident distress and inconvenience. These were reasonable actions by the landlord.
9. On 25 June 2024, the resident escalated her complaint and said her query remained unresolved. The landlord replied at stage 2 on 8 August 2024. It explained the service charges and said it was investigating some increases. It said the resident could request documents via a section 22 request. It also signposted her to the FTT service who are specialists in service charges. The landlord offered her a further £20 compensation for the time and effort spent in getting the complaint resolved.
10. Where the landlord acknowledged failings, our role is to consider whether the redress it offered put things right for the resident. Its total offer of £80 was in line with our compensation guidance for a finding of service failure which has caused distress and inconvenience for a short duration.
11. In summary, the landlord delayed responding to the resident’s query. It gave her the information required during its complaint process and signposted her to further support. It offered compensation consistent with our compensation guidance for a service failure. We have found reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s service charge query.

12. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in the Code (April 2024). The timescales in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
13. The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint and she contacted us. We asked it to respond to her by 9 May 2024, which it did. In its stage 1 response it apologised and offered £40 compensation for its poor complaint handling.
14. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint escalation within its complaints policy. It asked the resident for more time to respond, and it sent its stage 2 reply within that time. It apologised and offered her £70 for the delay and poor complaint handling.
15. In summary, the landlord did not comply with its complaints policy, however, it recognised the delay at both stages and offered compensation to try and put things right. The offers were in line with our compensation guidance for a failure that caused distress and inconvenience. As such we have found reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Learning

16. The landlord should ensure it responds to resident complaints within its policy times.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

17. The landlord did not action the resident’s first email querying her service charges. As per our spotlight report on knowledge and information management, published in May 2023, we expect landlords to keep a robust record of contacts with residents. This is because clear, accurate and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise.

Communication

18. The landlord’s communication via its complaint responses were detailed and clear.