ForHousing Limited (202400197)

Background

1. The resident purchased her share of the property on 14 November 2022. She complained to the landlord in August 2023. She said that, due to the landlord’s lack of communication, she should not have to pay the rent arrears that had accrued between November 2022 and July 2023. The issues within the case remain unresolved at the time of this investigation.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Communication with the resident when she moved into the property and its handling of her linked rent arrears.
   2. Handling of the associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. The landlord made an offer of redress which, in our opinion, resolved errors in its communication with the resident when she moved into the property and its handling of her linked rent arrears.
   2. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s communication with the resident and her linked rent arrears

4. There were errors in the landlord’s communication with the resident when she moved into the property. However, the landlord awarded compensation to the resident which was proportionate to its failings.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord’s complaint handling was in line with its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’), which sets out our expectations around landlord complaint handling practices.

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.

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.

6. The resident’s lease agreement sets out her obligation to pay rent to the landlord each month. On 18 December 2022 the resident signed a further document from her solicitor which confirmed she understood her obligations regarding rent payments.
7. In its complaint responses, the landlord said that the resident was liable for the rent payments as specified in her lease agreement. It stated the arrears that she had accrued between November 2022 and July 2023 could not be “written off”. It acknowledged that its lack of communication would have caused the resident delays in paying her rent, but said its expectation was that she should have put the money aside each month. This was reasonable. The resident was aware of her obligation to pay rent and should have ensured she was able to do this.
8. However, there were failings regarding the landlord’s communication when the resident moved into the property. In January 2023 the landlord received notification from the resident’s solicitor that she was the new shared owner of the property. It should have provided her with a “welcome letter” in line with its shared ownership income procedure. It did not make contact with the resident and it did not update its records to reflect the change in owner. The lack of communication with the resident was poor. This was a failing which would have caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
9. The resident contacted the landlord in April 2023 and requested it contacted her regarding rent payments. The landlord did not respond to this request, which was a further communication failing.
10. The resident said that the landlord’s lack of communication has had an impact on her health. We acknowledge this has been a difficult time for her. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
11. On 28 July 2023 the landlord contacted the resident. It apologised for its lack of communication and explained that the staff role responsible for communicating with shared ownership residents had been vacant since January 2023, which was the reason for the delay. The landlord’s email acknowledged its failings and demonstrated accountability. This was positive.
12. Within the landlord’s email on 28 July 2023, it informed the resident of the rent arrears that had accrued since November 2022. It also explained that it would not be implementing the rent increase for the year 2023/24 because it could not “reasonably assume” that the resident had received the letter regarding this, as it would have been addressed to the previous occupant. This was fair as it showed it had taken accountability for its errors.
13. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was detailed and reasonable. It acknowledged its communication failings and the impact this likely had on the resident. It stated that it did not expect the resident to pay the rent arrears in “one lump sum” and suggested that she meet with its staff member to discuss an affordable payment plan. It also acknowledged the fact that the resident had disclosed in her complaint that she had health vulnerabilities and stated that it did not want to “place more distress” on her. This was fair and demonstrated consideration and empathy for the resident’s circumstances.
14. The landlord awarded the resident £300 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its lack of communication between January 2023 and July 2023. This offer aligns with our compensation guidance (published on our website), which sets out our approach to compensation. The guidance says that awards within this range are appropriate where there was a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident.
15. As we have not identified any further failings, we are satisfied that the offer made was proportionate in the circumstances of the complaint. Due to this, we have made a finding of reasonable redress.

16. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. Its policy states it will issue a full response within 10 working days for stage 1 complaints and within 20 working days for complaints at stage 2. These timescales align with the Code as referenced above.
17. The landlord’s complaint response at stage 2 was delayed. However, it notified the resident of an extension to its timescales. This was compliant with its complaints policy. Furthermore, the landlord escalated the resident’s complaint on the same day and reassured the resident that she did not need to provide reasons for her escalation unless she wanted to. This was in line with the Code and demonstrated a positive complaint handling culture.

Learning

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

18. The records that the landlord provided were adequate for us to complete our investigation.

Communication

19. The landlord’s communication with the resident throughout the complaints process demonstrated good practice. The complaint responses demonstrated empathy and effective use of tone to support positive communication.