GreenSquareAccord Limited (202227249)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202227249

GreenSquareAccord Limited

30 January 2024

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 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 concerns about the window cleaning service.
2. This investigation has also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated formal complaint. 

Background and summary of events

3. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord and lives in a flat. The resident’s flat is in a low rise block that has 8 flats in total.
4. The resident pays a variable service charge to the landlord. For communal services the resident pays a proportion of the total cost of the landlord providing the service. Communal services include the window cleaning.

Summary of events

5. The resident has reported that the windows in the block were cleaned in October 2020 and were not cleaned again until October 2022. He believes that he paid service charges to the landlord for the window cleaning during the 2 year period that he said the service was not delivered.
6. On 26 January 2023 the resident called the landlord to discuss the service charge he paid for the window cleaning. The notes taken from the call state that the resident had raised a number of requests for the landlord to call him back about the service charges.  
7. The landlord recorded a stage 2 complaint, sent the resident an acknowledgment on 30 January 2023 and said in this that it aimed to respond by 10 February 2023.
8. On 6 February 2023 the resident contacted us with his concerns. He said that he believed the residents of the block had collectively paid £400 in service charges for window cleaning that had not been delivered. He advised that he had not received call backs that he requested from the landlord to discuss this. We wrote to the landlord with the resident’s concerns as it was not made clear to us whether a formal complaint had been raised. It responded and confirmed it had already logged the complaint.
9. On 21 February 2023 the resident emailed the landlord to chase its complaint response. The landlord responded, apologised for the delay and said it would respond by 28 February 2023.
10. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 27 February 2023. It apologised for the delay in responding and explained that it was the result of capacity issues in its Customer Care Team. It said that window cleaning was supposed to be done quarterly, with a total of 4 visits a year. It confirmed that as of October 2022 it had a new contractor delivering the window cleaning service. It said that it was unable to access the data from the previous contractor who delivered the service and therefore could not confirm whether window cleaning visits were missed between October 2020 and October 2022.
11. The landlord said that once the financial year ended in April 2023 it would reconcile the actual service charge costs that it had incurred for that year. It advised that its Service Charge and Estates teams were going to work together during the reconciliation process to establish how many windows cleans were completed by the contractors during the period in question. It said that if window cleaning had been missed it would be reflected in the summary of accounts that it would issue to the resident in September 2023. The landlord upheld the complaint because of the delay in providing its response. It offered the resident £50 compensation in recognition of the delay.
12. On 3 March 2023 the landlord processed the compensation payment to the resident. On 10 March 2023 the resident questioned why it had paid him £50 as he understood that he would be paid £400. In response the landlord confirmed that £50 was what it had offered in its complaint response. It acknowledged that the resident had previously questioned why all of the residents in the block had paid the landlord £400 in service charges for the window cleaning but said that it had not agreed to pay this amount to him.
13. The parties remained in communication throughout March 2023. Between 17 and 28 March 2023, the resident said in conversations with the landlord that the lack of window cleaning throughout 2021 had not been addressed by way of an adjustment in the service charges. He said that the £50 compensation offered by the landlord did not reflect the service charges that he had paid for a window cleaning service that was not provided. He also stated that the windows had not been cleaned since October 2022 and that previously he had not received call backs from the landlord to discuss his concerns. 
14. The landlord escalated the resident’s complaint to stage 3 of the complaints procedure on 28 March 2023.
15. On 4 April 2023 the resident emailed the landlord about a call that he was due to receive from it on 31 March 2023 regarding his complaint. A chaser email was sent to the Customer Care Team. We have not been able to tell from the information provided whether the team called the resident.
16. On 5 April 2023 the landlord provided its stage 3 response. It upheld the stage 2 response and said that it was satisfied the resident’s complaint had been answered. It confirmed that it had charged a service charge for the window cleaning during the period in question. It said that it had requested invoices and proof of work from the previous contractor and the current contractor because it was in a position where it could not prove or disprove that the service had been completed during the period in question. The landlord noted that it had not received complaints about the window cleaning service from any other resident in the block. In relation to the £400 the resident believed had been paid for the window cleaning, the landlord said that this amount was not solely for the window cleaning and included other services it delivered to the block.
17. The landlord said that if, on review of the evidence it requested, it found that the window cleaning had not been completed it would refund the resident a maximum of £25. It said that as it already offered the resident £50 compensation it was satisfied that it had offered a fair and reasonable resolution.
18. As the resident remained unhappy with the outcome of the complaint he referred it to us to consider.

Post complaints procedure

19. On 18 July 2023 the resident reported to the landlord that the day before the windows in the communal hallway had been cleaned but the residents’ windows had not been cleaned. He noted that residents were paying for all windows to be cleaned and asked the landlord for clarification.
20. The landlord responded on 28 July 2023 and said that it previously cleaned all the windows in the block but, following a Section 20 consultation, it only cleaned the communal windows in the block as of April 2023. It confirmed that the service charges would be reflective of the change to the service. 
21. On 20 September 2023 the landlord sent the resident the summary of account   for the period between 1 April 2022 and 31 March 2023. This provided details about what it had estimated to spend on the services delivered and how much it had actually spent on those services. For the window cleaning service the landlord estimated a spend of £150 for that period but it did not actually incur any expense for that service within the year.
22. In a conversation we had with the resident on 11 January 2023 he said that he had been told by his Housing Officer that the landlord was still providing window cleaning to all of the windows in the block. This information conflicts with the information that the resident was provided in July 2023.

Assessment

The landlord’s specification schedule for window cleaning.

23. Window cleaning to the block is to be completed on a quarterly basis, meaning it is completed 4 times a year.
24. The specification schedule states that the contractor should provide the landlord with a monthly invoice which itemises all work that has been completed. The monthly invoice is expected to include the correct order number, addresses, completion dates, full costing and confirmation as to whether the work was planned or completed on an ad-hoc basis.

The landlord’s response to queries about the window cleaning service.

25. The resident’s concern in this case is that he has paid service charges for window cleaning but he does not believe that the service was delivered for 2 years between October 2020 and October 2022.
26. The landlord confirmed in its response that it charged for the delivery of the window cleaning service during the period in question. Given this, it is a reasonable expectation that it would have received invoices from its contractors who delivered the service at that time.
27. The landlord said in the response to the complaint that it was unable to access the data from the contractor who was appointed to deliver the window cleaning service before October 2022. It offered no explanation in its response to the complaint as to why it could not access the information.
28. We note that in accordance with Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (the Act) the resident had the opportunity to request an inspection of the supporting accounts for the window cleaning charges. Such a request would have needed to be within 6 months of the landlord providing the summary of the service charge account. There is no evidence of the resident submitting such a request to the landlord for the period in question.
29. Nevertheless, where a landlord delivers a service at estate or block level, it is good practice for a landlord to ensure that it has overseen its contractor’s delivery of services at estate or block level, ensuring that the service agreement is being adhered to. It could do so through regularly scheduled checks or requesting proof on the completion of any work, to confirm that work is being completed and to the standard expected. Having records of such checks also puts the landlord in a position to provide comprehensive responses to complaints about the delivery of the service or service charges.
30. In the absence of any evidence to show that the window cleaning was carried out between October 2020 and October 2022, it was reasonable for the landlord to request this from the former contractor. It required this evidence in order to determine whether or not the window cleaning service was delivered between October 2020 and October 2022.
31. During the course of the complaint the resident also highlighted to the landlord that the windows had not been cleaned since October 2022. The landlord did not address this in its response but we have seen evidence to show that window cleaning was completed after October 2022 and was done in February 2023. The landlord has also provided evidence of further window cleaning completed in the year 2023. The information the landlord has provided to show evidence of the window cleaning service that was delivered from October 2022, demonstrates that the landlord has taken action to implement good practices.
32. We note that since the contractor was appointed for the window cleaning in October 2022, it has provided the landlord with completion reports including photographs of the areas cleaned. In addition to the completion reports the landlord’s Estate Warden also visited the estate in March, June and July 2023.
33. The landlord concluded in its response to the complaint that it was satisfied that the resident’s complaint had been answered despite saying that it was waiting for the evidence from its contractor to assess whether the service had been delivered.
34. The landlord noted that it had not received any other complaints from the residents in the block and this was a reasonable observation for it to make. If the windows were not cleaned within a 2 year period it is possible that other residents would also notice this and bring this to the landlord’s attention. However, the absence of complaints from other residents alone could not be relied on to show conclusively whether the service was delivered or not.
35. The landlord said in its response that when it received the evidence of the service delivery that it had requested from the contractor, it would review this and if necessary, adjust the service charge account during the reconciliation period. It clarified that its reconciliation period would start after April 2023 and once it ended it could provide residents with the summary of the service charge account.
36. We have seen that the summary of the account was sent to the resident on 20 September 2023. The summary covered March 2022 until April 2023. This was therefore only a part of the 2 year period during which the resident said the service was not delivered. We note that the account showed that the landlord had not incurred any costs for window cleaning services and as agreed, the landlord adjusted the charges to reflect this.
37. While the landlord adjusted the service charges from March 2022 it did not clarify within the summary it provided whether it had received the evidence it said it had requested from the previous contractor. It also did not clarify whether it considered that an adjustment was required for the remainder of the period (from October 2020 to February 2022) during which the resident reports that the window cleaning was not delivered.
38. On 19 January 2024 the landlord confirmed to us that it was unable to get the evidence of the delivery of the window cleaning service from the former contractor appointed before October 2022. It confirmed that it is in the process of introducing a new policy that reinforces that, where it provides an additional service under a service charge, it will monitor that these are provided to the required frequency. As explained above this is considered to be in line with best practice.
39. The evidence the landlord provided demonstrates that the landlord has kept completion records since the new contractor was appointed in October 2022. This, in addition to the provision in its new policy for it to monitor the services it delivers, indicates that the landlord has applied learnings from this complaint about the importance of retaining evidence of the services it delivers and charges for.
40. While the landlord has incorporated relevant learnings into its practices following the complaint, maladministration has been found in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concern about the delivery of the window cleaning service. The reasons being that: 
    1. The landlord confirmed when it responded to the complaint that it charged for the window cleaning service during the period in question and it accepted that it had no evidence of the service delivered. It did not recognise that its inability to demonstrate evidence of the delivery of a service it charged for, was in itself a shortcoming.
    2. It said that it requested evidence from the former contractor and agreed in its complaint response that it would review this evidence on receipt. It has informed us recently that it was not able to get the requested evidence but there is no indication of it informing the resident of this. The summary it provided as of September 2023 confirmed that no costs were charged for window cleaning between March and October 2022. However, the landlord has not offered the resident any further apology for the fact that it was not able to conclude whether or not the window cleaning was delivered from October 2020 to February 2022.
41. The landlord said in its response that if it found proof that the window cleaning was not completed, it could offer the resident a maximum of £25 compensation. It noted that as it had already offered the resident £50, it considered this offer a fair and reasonable resolution to the complaint.
42. The £50 compensation that the landlord offered in its stage 2 response was not a fair and reasonable resolution to the complaint. The offer was made to the resident in recognition of the delay in it providing its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord failed to offer any apology for its inability to draw a conclusion to the resident’s complaint as a result of the absence of any records to demonstrate whether the window cleaning was carried out.
43. The landlord has confirmed that it did not get the evidence from the former contractor to show that the window cleaning service was delivered by the contractor who was in place before October 2022.
44. In recognition of this we have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident a further £50 compensation. This order takes into consideration that the landlord has not been able to provide the resident with confirmation as to whether or not the window cleaning was completed during the entire period in question. The detriment to the resident is not considered significant and the landlord has demonstrated that learnings taken from this complaint have been applied to its oversight of the services it delivers to the estate.
45. We have also made a recommendation for the landlord to clarify whether or not its window cleaning service is being delivered to the residents’ windows or just the communal areas.

Complaint handling

46. The landlord’s complaints process has 3 stages:
    1. Stage 1 – It will try and resolve the complaint informally and within 2 working days.
    2. Stage 2 – It will investigate and respond within 10 working days.
    3. Stage 3 – It will review whether the case has been handled fairly and reasonably. It will respond within 10 working days at this stage.
47. On receipt of the resident’s complaint the landlord made the appropriate decision to consider the complaint at stage 2 of its process. Given the nature of the complaint it was unlikely that it could resolve the complaint without an investigation.
48. The landlord appropriately recognised the delay in it providing its stage 2 response. Its offer of £50 was a reasonable offer in recognition of the delay including the resident’s time and trouble chasing it for a response after the initial deadline of 10 February 2023 lapsed.  The landlord’s response at stage 3 was in line with the timeframe for that stage in its process.
49. However the landlord’s conclusion on the complaint contradicted its own admissions within the response. It found that it had answered the resident’s complaint but at stage 2 it confirmed that it could not prove or disprove whether the window cleaning service was delivered.
50. One of the complaint handling principles in our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) is that a landlord should seek sufficient, reliable information so that it can make fair and appropriate findings.
51. The landlord’s responses to the complaint confirmed that it did not have the information from the previous contractor and had to request this, to make findings on the resident’s complaint. Without receipt of the information it said it requested from the contractor, it concluded that it had responded fairly to the resident’s complaint. Its response to the complaint was not fair as it was not able to clarify whether the complaint that the window cleaning was not carried out, was upheld or not. It did not offer any apology for its inability to draw a conclusion on the matter.
52. The landlord also did not respond to the concern the resident raised about it not calling him back after he had made call back requests. We have seen evidence of the resident chasing the landlord regarding its failure to call him on 31 March 2023 about his complaint. There is no evidence of the landlord calling him as agreed and its response did not acknowledge the resident’s efforts in trying to speak with it about the matter. This was not fair given that its lack of engagement with the resident was an issue that he had raised in his stage 3 complaint.
53. A service failure finding has been made by the landlord in its complaint handling. We have already assessed and made orders to recognise that the landlord has not provided a conclusion to the matter of the complaint. Therefore an order has been made for the landlord to write a letter of apology to the resident to acknowledge the shortcomings found in its response to the substantial matter regarding the delivery of the window cleaning service between October 2020 and October 2022 and its handling of the formal complaint.

Determination (decision)

54. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme maladministration has been found in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concern about the delivery of the window cleaning service.
55. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme a service failure has been found in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

56. The landlord has not been able to ascertain whether or not the windows were cleaned during the period in question. It confirmed that it requested evidence from the previous contractor to assess whether the service was delivered. It has not received this evidence but there is no indication of the landlord notifying the resident of this after the complaint response. There is also no evidence of it offering the resident any apology or compensation to recognise that it had no evidence to show the window cleaning service was delivered during the period in question, despite it charging for the service.
57. The landlord offered the resident compensation proportionate to the delay in its response at stage 2. However, its response to the complaint was not in line with the principles of the Code. It concluded that it had provided an answer to the complaint when it admitted that it did not have the relevant information to decide whether or not the service complained about had been delivered. It also did not respond to the issue that the resident raised about its communication regarding the complaint. 

Orders and recommendations

58. The landlord has already paid the resident the £50 compensation that it offered in its complaint response. Within 4 weeks of this report it is ordered that the landlord arranges for an additional compensation payment of £50 be made to the resident. This is in recognition of the finding regarding its response to the resident’s concern about the delivery of the window cleaning service.
59. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord is to write to the resident with an apology for the failings in its response to his concerns about the charges and the associated complaint.
60. The landlord is to provide us with confirmation of compliance with the above orders.