Guinness Housing Association Limited (201915461)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201915461

Guinness Housing Association Limited

29 June 2023

 

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:
    1. management of the resident’s rent account, and;
    2. its complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has occupied the property under an assured tenancy agreement since February 2011. The property is a 1-bedroom flat in a medium rise block.
  2. In April 2019, the landlord issued a notice seeking possession and initiated court proceedings because of rent arrears. The resident told the landlord that he had paid rent due. The resident was recovering from cancer. He told the landlord that rent demands and legal proceedings were having an adverse impact on his underlying health condition. It is this Service’s understanding that during legal proceedings, the resident provided evidence of payments that resulted in legal proceedings ending.
  3. On 31 January 2020, the resident complained about how the landlord had managed his rent account. He contacted this Service when he had not received a complaint response from the landlord.
  4. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 8 January 2021, following intervention by this Service. The landlord confirmed that payments had been transferred to the correct rent account. It advised that regular payments had been made and the account was in credit. The resident asked for his complaint to be escalated on 27 January 2021 as he was not satisfied. The landlord did not respond.
  5. The landlord contacted the resident in April 2021 to tell him that his rent account was in arrears. In May 2021 it issued a second notice seeking possession. The resident followed up his earlier complaint with the landlord.
  6. In its second stage 1 response, issued on 23 July 2021, the landlord apologised for distress caused. It told the resident that no rent payments had been received since September 2020. It asked the resident to provide proof of payment and said it could not investigate further. The resident escalated his complaint.
  7. In its final response, issued on 15 September 2021, the landlord asked the resident to check that he was using the correct payment method and to provide evidence of payment. It said that failure to provide evidence could result in further action. The resident remained dissatisfied with the response about the way the landlord had managed his rent account and dealt with his complaints. He escalated his complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s management of the resident’s rent account.

  1. The tenancy agreement sets out the resident’s responsibility to make weekly rent payments. It says that the landlord may seek to end the tenancy by serving the resident with a notice seeking possession if this tenancy condition is not met.
  2. The landlord’s arrears policy sets out the approach it will take when a resident is behind with payments. The policy says the landlord, “will take a fair and consistent approach”. It will balance action to help tenants avoid getting behind with payments in the first place, with support when they do, and legal action when necessary. The policy says the landlord will liaise closely with residents and is “here to help and will take individual situations into account”. The landlord “will get in touch to find out the reason why payments have been missed”.
  3. Records provided by the landlord show regular email contact from the resident about his rent account. For example, on 1 February 2019, the resident sent a copy of a payment receipt to the landlord. In an email dated 10 April 2019, the resident said the landlord had not added payments to his rent account. In its complaint response on 8 January 2021, the landlord said it had tried to contact the resident in April 2019 about the arrears. It said that a notice seeking possession was served as it had struggled to contact him. Records provided by the landlord show the resident contacted the landlord in April 2019.
  4. The landlord’s arrears policy says it will help and support residents when they get behind with payments. The landlord’s approach was to ask the resident to provide proof of payment. There is evidence in records provided by the landlord that the resident emailed receipts. There is no evidence that the landlord provided help or support to the resident by investigating where the payments had gone. It did not liaise closely with the resident over the missing payments. The resident raised the effect the situation was having on his wellbeing. The landlord continued to issue letters for overdue rent and initiated possession proceedings. There is no evidence that the landlord took the resident’s circumstances into account.
  5. It is this Service’s understanding that the resident provided further evidence of rent payments during legal proceedings in January 2020. The landlord then accepted that payments had been made but had not been credited to the resident’s rent account. The rent account was rectified by the landlord and legal proceedings ended. The resident had previously provided evidence and the landlord had reasonable opportunities to provide help and support to the resident to resolve the issue much earlier, and before it took legal action. Because it did not provide help and support, the landlord caused distress and inconvenience for the resident, who had told it that its actions were having an adverse effect on his health and wellbeing. This Service finds that by not following its arrears policy, the landlord’s actions were maladministration as it did not act reasonably or fairly when managing the resident’s rent account.
  6. This Service has also noted inconsistencies in the landlord’s record keeping and communications. In the complaint response in January 2021, the landlord told the resident that regular payments were being made and that his account was in credit. In the complaint response in July 2021, the landlord told the resident that no payments had been made since September 2020. In addition, the landlord’s complaints log in June 2021 said that that it had not kept notes from the previous complaint on what account the resident was paying his rent to. Good record keeping is integral to effective complaint handling and a landlords’ overall service provision. In this case, evidence shows that there was poor record-keeping on complaint outcomes and inconsistent communications about the rent account. This further contributed to the resident’s distress and inconvenience.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord’s approach to complaints is set out in its complaints policy. This says the landlord will provide a decision within 10 working days. Where there is good reason, it says it may take longer, but this “will not exceed a further 10 working days unless an additional extension is agreed by both parties”. The policy says the resident can request an escalation if they are not satisfied with the first response. The request should be made within 15 working days, but the landlord may consider a request after this time in exceptional circumstances. Complaints that are escalated will receive a response within 20 working days.
  2. The resident first raised a complaint about his rent account on 31 January 2020. The landlord issued a response advising him that payments had been transferred to the correct account. In its response, the landlord did not clarify whether the complaint had been upheld or say how the resident could escalate the complaint. Following contact from the resident, this Service contacted the landlord in June 2020 about the status of the complaint. This Service contacted the landlord again in January 2021 as no response had been issued. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 8 January 2021. This was almost a year after the original complaint was made and over 6 months after this Service first contacted the landlord.
  3. The stage 1 response confirmed that rent payments had gone to a different account. It said that regular payments were being made and that the account was in credit. The resident was not satisfied and escalated his complaint 19 working days after the response. He asked for an apology. The landlord did not issue a stage 2 response. There is no evidence that the landlord gave a reason for this.
  4. When the landlord issued a second notice seeking possession in May 2021, the resident contacted the landlord and said it was refusing to process his complaint. In response the landlord opened a new complaint and said it would respond in 20 working days. The landlord’s records include an internal email dated 9 June 2021 that asks whether payments were going to the wrong account again. It said the new complaint was “basically the same” as the previous complaint. The record also said that there were “no notes from the previous complaint” to confirm what account the resident was paying rent to. The landlord continued to treat this as a new complaint, and as part of its investigation asked the resident to provide evidence of payments.
  5. The landlord’s stage 1 response took 32 working days to issue. It apologised for distress caused but it contradicted the previous stage 1 response by saying that no payments had been received since September 2020. The landlord said that as the resident had not provided evidence of payments as requested, it was unable to investigate further.
  6. The resident escalated his complaint on 30 July 2021 as he remained dissatisfied. In its final response, sent 33 working days later, the landlord suggested that the resident might be using an out-of-date payment card. The landlord continued to ask the resident to provide evidence of payment.
  7. This Service finds that the landlord consistently failed to deal with the resident’s complaints in line with its policy or this Service’s Complaint Handling Code. It did not provide a complaint response when the resident first raised a complaint, and only did so a year later when this Service intervened. It did not escalate the complaint when the resident requested a review in January 2021. The landlord’s complaints policy says a review should be requested within 15 working days. Although the request was made 19 days later, the landlord acted unreasonably when it did not escalate the complaint, especially as it had taken a year to respond. When the resident contacted the landlord in June 2021, the landlord raised a new complaint, even though evidence shows that the landlord accepted that the complaint was “basically the same”. The landlord said it would respond in 20 working days (its policy says 10 working days). It then took 32 working days to respond. It took 33 working days to issue its final response, when its policy says it will respond in 20 working days.
  8. As a result of the landlord’s complaint handling failures, the resident spent time chasing responses. This caused frustration and inconvenience for the resident, who had highlighted the effect the landlord’s actions were having on his health and wellbeing. It is the view of this Service that the landlord’s actions on complaint handling were maladministration.

Compensation policy

  1. The landlord’s compensation sets out the approach it will take when something goes wrong, and it is at fault. The policy says it will pay compensation when an apology or other remedy is not sufficient. Compensation will be offered when the resident “faced obstacles or difficulties that could have been avoided, and as a result they were put under distress or significant inconvenience over above that which would normally be expected when incidents of this type occur. This is particularly applicable to customers with a physical or mental disability”. When deciding the amount of compensation, the landlord’s policy says it will consider: severity of service failure; the length of time it went on; the number of different failures; the cumulative impact; the resident’s circumstances or vulnerabilities, including on health and wellbeing; and unreasonable delays in resolving matters or by poor complaint handling. The policy says that where the matter “took a long time to resolve and resulted in significant inconvenience having significant impact… which is likely to cause longer-term distress” it will pay £700 plus.
  2. It is the view of this Service that the landlord’s failures caused distress and significant inconvenience for the resident. The resident had highlighted his vulnerabilities and the cumulative effect that the situation was having on his health and wellbeing. He faced obstacles that could have been avoided. The matter went on for a considerable time, the landlord initiated legal action, and there were unreasonable delays in resolving the matter. Consequently, the landlord must pay compensation in line with its compensation policy.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of the management of the resident’s rent account. This is because by not following its arrears policy, it did not act reasonably or fairly when managing the resident’s rent account.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling. This is because it consistently failed to deal with the resident’s complaints in line with its policy or this Service’s Complaint Handling Code.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to write to the resident to apologise for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failures in the management of the resident’s rent account and the subsequent complaint handling.
  2. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £700 in compensation. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears. The compensation comprises:
    1. £500 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience for the resident caused by failures in managing the resident’s rent account.
    2. £200 in recognition of the time and trouble for the resident caused by failures in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  3. The landlord is ordered to conduct a review of this complaint, considering its complaints policy and associated guidance to demonstrate learning from the outcome of this complaint. This review should be completed with reference to the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
  4. The landlord is ordered to confirm to this Service that the above orders have been complied with within 4 weeks of this report.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord review how it implements its arrears policy when a resident has raised concerns about their rent account, particularly where a potential impact on health and wellbeing has been identified.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord review its record keeping on complaints outcomes and rent accounts to ensure that it has accurate records.