Clarion Housing Association Limited (201915053)

Back to Top

 

 

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201915053

Clarion Housing Association Limited

12 January 2021


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the condition of the shared garden.

Background and summary of events

  1. The tenancy agreement confirms that the resident, who is a tenant of the landlord, has a shared garden with her neighbour.
  2. Following contact from the resident, this Service wrote to the landlord on 26 February 2020. We explained that the resident complained about the condition of the shared garden, and that she had said she tried to raise her concerns with the landlord, but had not received a response.
  3. On 10 March 2020 the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint. It confirmed that it briefly spoke with her on 10 March 2020, and that she had mentioned the condition of the garden, which included stagnant water, animal faeces, and holes, and that a lack of a fence was allowing foxes to gain access. The landlord noted that the resident explained she had reported this to the landlord during a meeting in September 2019, but no updates had been received since. The landlord said it had no record of a report made in September 2019 about the garden. The landlord advised that it would visit the resident on 12 March 2020 to undertake an inspection.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on 26 March 2020. She confirmed that the landlord attended on 12 March and had said somebody would be back in touch, but she had not heard anything more. The resident asked to escalate her complaint.
  5. On 1 April 2020 the landlord asked the resident to confirm if she had received an update since her last contact. The resident confirmed on the same day that she had not. The resident’s complaint was subsequently escalated, and the landlord confirmed this with the resident.
  6. The landlord sent its final complaint response on 24 April 2020. It explained that it considered the action taken at stage one (to arrange a visit to discuss and understand the resident’s concerns), to be appropriate. It apologised for not updating her about the outcome of the visit and confirmed that it had spoken with the relevant staff members regarding this.
  7. The landlord explained that, in general, the condition of the garden was acceptable, but it had identified some issues for which it needed to contact the resident’s neighbour (it did not specify what those issues were). It said that a visit with the neighbor had been scheduled, but had not gone ahead and had been postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic. It said that was why the resident had not been updated in a timely manner. The landlord confirmed that it was actively attempting to contact the neighbour so that a solution could be found regarding the garden. Once it addressed the issues with the neighbour, the landlord would update the resident on the situation.
  8. The landlord confirmed that the resident had exhausted its complaint procedure and advised how she could direct her complaint to this Service if she remained dissatisfied.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement states that she has a shared garden. Shared gardens are usually the responsibility of each tenant to jointly maintain and manage. Despite that, in this case, the landlord has taken on the responsibility of investigating and seeking to resolve the garden issues the resident raised.
  2. No evidence has been provided for this investigation showing reports of problems with the shared garden prior to the complaint to the landlord on 26 February 2020.
  3. In response to the garden issues raised in the complaint the landlord inspected the property on 12 March 2020. That was prompt, and an appropriate response to the resident’s concerns, because the landlord needed to ascertain the presence and scale of the reported problems before considering any action. However, it did not follow up its visit with an update to the resident about the outcome of its visit, and what actions (if any) it planned to take. The completeness of the landlord’s first complaint response relied on the that post-inspection update, and so, the omission left matters unresolved and was a failing, which understandably led to the resident raising the matter again and seeking an escalation. The landlord acknowledged its failing in its final complaint response. It apologised and explained how it had occurred. It explained the outcome of its visit, but only generally, and did not address any of the specific problems the resident had listed, such as stagnant water, holes, or animal faeces. The landlord explained it had identified some “issues” which it would raise with the neighbour, but did not explain what those issues were, whether they were the same ones the resident had listed, or what actions it could or would take in light of them. Without that detail there was no indication that the landlord had properly considered the resident’s reports, or that it was taking appropriate action.
  4. It is understandable that the landlord’s subsequent efforts to discuss matters with the neighbour might have been interrupted by the Covid events after March 2020. Nonetheless, the landlord’s responses to the resident were unclear and incomplete, lacking the details necessary to reasonably resolve her concerns.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the condition of the shared garden.

Order

The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £150 in recognition of the service failure identified in this investigation. This should be done within four weeks of the date of this determination. The landlord should update this Service when payment has been made.