A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202400068)

Decision
Case ID	202400068
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	A2Dominion Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	15 April 2026

Background

1. The resident requested a breakdown of her 2022/23 service charges and queried specific costs. She challenged the increase in rent and service charges. She also questioned the reasonableness of some charges she said she did not benefit from due to her property’s location.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the:
   1. Increase of rent and service charges.
   2. Reasonableness of service charges.
   3. Landlord’s response to the resident’s queries about her service charges.
   4. Landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. The complaint about the increase of rent and service charges is outside of our jurisdiction and we have not investigated it.
   2. The complaint about the reasonableness of service charges is outside of our jurisdiction and we have not investigated it.
   3. Service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s queries about her service charges.
   4. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Increase of rent and service charges

4. We do not consider complaints about the level or increase of rent or service charges.

Reasonableness of service charges

5. A court or tribunal would be better placed to consider this element of the complaint.

Response to the resident’s queries about her service charges

6. The landlord delayed in responding to some of the resident’s queries and did not respond to others. It did not apologise or offer compensation for the communication failures identified.

Complaint handling

7. The landlord identified complaint handling failures and put them right with its apology and offer of 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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic it has due regard to our apologies guidance	No later than 13 May 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £75 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to her queries about her service charges. 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 13 May 2026
3	Specific action The landlord must respond in writing to the resident’s query about why residents of a particular street did not contribute towards estate costs. It must provide us with a copy of this letter by the due date.	No later than 13 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 £25 for its delayed stage 2 response, as agreed in its final complaint response. Our finding of reasonable redress for its complaint handling is made on the basis this compensation is paid.
If it has not already done so, we recommend the landlord pays the resident the £50 for its refusal to respond to her complaint about rent and service charge increases, and the £100 for any associated inconvenience, as agreed in its final complaint response.
We recommend the landlord contacts the resident to: discuss any services she believes she does not receive (aside from those she said she did not benefit from due to the location of her property) clarify whether she would like to request to inspect the service charge accounts and receipts under section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LATA) ask whether she has any outstanding queries about specific service charge costs

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
12 February 2024	The resident complained to the landlord about the service charges since the start of her lease. She said: the breakdown of charges were unclear, and she wanted to know what the external agents charge, management fee, and examination fee (the 3 main charges) included charges just before Christmas caused financial difficulty and stress she was charged for services to communal areas she did or could not access she wanted confirmation of what the charges were for, review the timing of them, check if it had overcharged her, and refund any overpayments
29 February 2024	The resident complained about the increase in her rent/service charge. The landlord said it would not respond to a complaint of this nature.
5 March 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint and: explained service charges were administered in line with the law and her lease, and the charging cycle could not be amended enclosed a service charge budget, asked her to confirm any enquiries or issues with specific services and said it would seek responses from the managing agent explained what examination fees covered offered to arrange a repayment agreement
20 March 2024	The resident told the landlord it had not addressed the increases in her rent/service charge. She questioned why she was paying for services she said she did not benefit from due to the location of her property. She asked what some specific costs referred to in the service charge budget were for. She also asked why residents of a specific street did not contribute to estate costs.
12 April 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said it should have responded to the resident’s complaint about rent and service charge increases. It offered £50 compensation for failing to progress a stage 1 complaint in February 2024, and £100 for any inconvenience, and explained the increases. It said under her lease, she had to pay the communal charges she said she did not benefit from. It advised her to seek a determination from the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) on the reasonableness of these. It agreed to temporarily reduce some charges to give her time to pursue this.   It offered £25 compensation for a delayed stage 2 response, outlined learning from its complaint handling and acknowledged it could have improved its communication.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident said she felt she was charged for services she did not receive, and she felt the landlord’s responses were unclear. She wanted it to provide clear explanations of charges and be transparent about how they were spent.

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 increase of rent and service charges
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

8. We do not investigate complaints about the level or increase of rent or service charges. As this element of the resident’s complaint centres on her dissatisfaction about the increase of rent and service charges, we will not investigate it. The FTT or court may be best placed to consider this matter.

Complaint	The reasonableness of service charges
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

9. The resident’s complaint is about services she said she did not benefit from due to the location of her property. 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. The FTT or court may be best placed to consider this matter. For these reasons, we have not investigated this element of the resident’s complaint.

Complaint	Response to the resident’s queries about her service charges
Finding	Service failure

10. The resident’s lease states she is required to pay a service charge in equal monthly instalments, without deduction. The service charge is defined as the amounts payable by the landlord under the superior lease, which we have not had sight of.
11. The landlord issued its year-end charges for the financial year 2022/23 to the resident on 18 September 2023. It notified her of the outstanding balance, in line with its leasehold policy. Its correspondence explained the 3 main charges and provided the details of who to contact if she was struggling to pay. This was in line with its leasehold policy. It also clearly outlined her rights to request a summary of costs and to inspect receipts and documents.
12. On 4 October 2023 the resident asked the landlord for a full breakdown of charges, which she was entitled to under section 21 of LATA. On 6 October 2023 she said it was unclear what the 3 main charges were for. She also expressed dissatisfaction with the timing of the charges, which she said were issued shortly before Christmas.
13. On 16 October 2023 the landlord emailed the resident attaching ‘service charge actuals’ within the 1-month timescale set out in section 21 of LATA. We have not had sight of the attached document which has limited our assessment of its adequacy. The landlord did not initially address her concerns about the timing of the charges.
14. In November 2023 the landlord told the resident it had requested a breakdown of costs. In January 2024, it sent her an income and expenditure statement for the financial year 2022/23. This did not break the costs down beyond the 3 main charges and was unlikely to assist the resident to further understand the charges. The service charge budget it later provided at stage 1 included a more detailed breakdown. It was reasonable for the landlord to ask the resident to identify any specific queries after reviewing this information.
15. In its stage 1 response, the landlord provided a reasonable explanation in relation to the timing of the year‑end charges. Its further correspondence in March and April 2024 included additional clarification about the process of issuing estimated and final service charges, which was reasonable.
16. It was clear the resident did not understand why she was being charged for services such as health and safety, play equipment, and hall hire. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to provide a further explanation of these costs. It could have also clarified whether she wished to exercise her right under section 22 of LATA to inspect supporting documents. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s query about why residents of a particular street did not contribute towards estate costs.
17. The resident said the matter had affected her wellbeing, sleep and work. While the landlord acknowledged it could have communicated more effectively, it did not apologise or offer compensation for the shortcomings identified. We have therefore found service failure and made a compensation order of £75. This is in line with our compensation guidance for a minor failure the landlord did not acknowledge or put right. We have also ordered the landlord to respond to the resident’s query about other residents’ contributions to estate costs.
18. In correspondence with us, the resident said she was charged for services she did not receive. We have recommended the landlord discusses this with her, along with any remaining queries about the charges, including whether she wishes to inspect receipts and other supporting documents.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Reasonable redress

19. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The landlord’s complaints policy timescales were in line with the 2022 Code.
20. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within 2 working days in line with its complaints policy. It responded in a further 14 working days. Though this was just outside the landlord’s policy timescales, but it was unlikely to have impacted the resident.
21. It is unclear when the resident escalated her complaint which has impacted our assessment. The landlord acknowledged her escalation on 8 March 2024 and said it would respond by 4 April 2024. At stage 2 it apologised for a delay in issuing its final response and offered £25 compensation for this. This offer was in line with our compensation guidance for a low-impact failure. Its response and offer of redress for its complaint handling overall was reasonable.
22. We have recommended the landlord re-offers the £25 if it has not already paid this. We have also recommended the landlord re-offers the £150 compensation it offered for failing to progress a stage 1 complaint and the associated inconvenience.

Learning

23. The landlord set out some learning in its stage 2 response. We have made some recommendations for it to clarify any outstanding queries with the resident. If appropriate, the landlord could consider providing the managing agent’s contact details to the resident, so she can make direct enquiries.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

24. The landlord did not provide a copy of the ‘service charge actuals’ it sent the resident in October 2023. Nor did it provide a copy of her complaint escalation. It is important for landlords to keep full records of complaint handling correspondence.

Communication

25. The landlord accepted its communication could have been improved. Our website sets out ‘landlord expectations’ in relation to service charges. It highlights the importance of landlords responding to enquiries promptly and presenting service charge information in an easy-to-understand format.