Housing For Women (202325535)

Decision
Case ID	202325535
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Housing For Women
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	13 January 2026

Background

The resident requested a detailed breakdown of her service charges. She raised a formal complaint as she felt that the landlord had failed to clarify costs, explain increases or consult on changes. She asked us to investigate after receiving responses from the landlord that she remains dissatisfied with.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about:
1. How the landlord responded to the resident’s service charge queries, including requests for breakdowns, clarification and specific details.
2. How the landlord handled her complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found:
1. The landlord is responsible for service failure with its handling of the resident’s service charge queries.
2. The landlord made an offer of redress in recognition of its handling of the complaint, which, in our opinion, resolved the complaint satisfactorily.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to the resident’s service charge queries

The landlord provided a reasonable response to the resident’s queries; however, its response was delayed.
The landlord should have handled the resident’s concerns more appropriately and demonstrated that the services the resident paid for had been delivered.

Complaint handling

The landlord has acknowledged its complaint handling failings and provided an offer of redress which recognises the delays and distress and inconvenience caused.

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 provided by its complaint team. 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 10 February 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s service charge queries. 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 10 February 2026
3	Review its records relating to appointments and services provided. The landlord should check its records and provide evidence to show its contractor visited the site and provided the services the resident has paid for. If it is unable to provide this, it should offer a refund for any missed appointments and services it has not provided. The landlord should provide a letter confirming its findings to the resident and the Ombudsman, including any evidence it finds.	No later than 10 February 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
If the landlord does not already have a schedule in place, it should consider arranging consistent and frequent checks of the communal areas. The landlord should decide on the frequency in which this will take place and shout stick to this.
Our decision on the landlord’s complaint handling is based on the landlord’s previous offer of compensation. We would expect the landlord to honour the £300 previously offered and ensure this is paid to the resident.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
07 November 2023	Following the resident’s request for a breakdown of the service charges, she raised a formal complaint. She said: The landlord did not provide clarification of the service charge costs or explain the increases in her service charge. She requested further information, including if the service charges are the same for all of the properties and if the person who determines the charges visits the individual properties. She highlighted an increase of the grounds maintenance charge from £8.41 to £26.08, without consultation and noting fewer visits than expected. She sought details on the communal utility charges and requested a copy of the landlord’s risk assessment for her flat and the block.
23 November 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response and confirmed it had consulted with its contractor, estate officers and compliance team. It said: The service charges vary by block depending on the facilities and its representative visits the estates to assess costs. The grounds maintenance charge had increased as it had decided that visits needed to be increased from 30 to 80 minutes, with monthly visits in winter and twice monthly in summer. The cleaning schedule will remain as once per month. It said notifying residents of increases counts as consultation and that residents can query charges and it would assess and feedback accordingly. Its contractor is responsible for sweeping up leaves in the autumn months, but gutter cleaning requires a repairs request by the residents. The estate services officer attends monthly and reports any repairs to its contractor. The utility charge covers communal electricity, and it provided a copy of its latest fire risk assessment.
19 December 2023	The landlord acknowledged that the resident was dissatisfied with its stage 1 response and stated that it would respond by 18 January 2024.
01 March 2024	The resident contacted the Housing Ombudsman as she had not received any further response from the landlord. The Ombudsman sent a chaser to the landlord and asked that it provided the resident with a written response by 8 March 2024. The landlord sent a further written acknowledgement to the resident.
08 March 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response, noting the resident’s dissatisfaction and reviewed all of the resident’s service charge disputes and complaints since October 2022. It said: When the resident raised a service charge dispute on 5 October 2023, it had provided a full breakdown, an overall summary of costs and responded to the resident’s queries on 26 October 2023. It operates a fixed service charge policy, and the resident has the right to request receipts and documents supporting service charges. It could arrange for the resident to view invoices for 2022-2023 either at home or at its office or provide copies. It also provided a service charge breakdown for 2021-2023. At the end of the financial year, the resident could view the costs for 2023-2024. It recognised that it did not respond to the resident’s escalation in line with its complaints policy, apologised and offered £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident raised her complaint with the Service as she was dissatisfied that the landlord had not provided a breakdown of her service charge or the information she had requested previously.

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	How the landlord responded to the resident’s service charge queries, including requests for breakdowns, clarification and specific details
Finding	Service failure

The tenancy agreement requires the resident to pay rent and a fixed service charge. In return, the landlord must provide the services covered by the charge but may change, add or remove services. It must also give the resident at least 4 weeks’ notice of any changes to the services it charges for.
On 25 August 2023, the landlord informed the resident of rent and service charge increases effective 1 October 2023, for the 2023-2024 period. It included a guidance note about the increase but no breakdown of charges. While providing a breakdown would have been good practice, it is not reasonable to penalise the landlord for this, as the resident had not requested the breakdown at this point.
The resident subsequently requested a breakdown of the charges on 3 September 2023. In response, the landlord provided a rent and service charge summary on 14 September 2023, which was reasonable, however, the resident did not receive this letter and chased the landlord on 27 September 2023. It is unclear why she did not receive this, but the landlord responded promptly, apologised, provided a copy of the breakdown by email and confirmed that it would send a hard copy in the post to her. It was reasonable that the landlord ensured she received this information as quickly as possible and offered alternative formats.
We are satisfied that the landlord provided a breakdown of the charges and so we have assessed whether the landlord adequately responded to the resident’s queries about her charges.
On 5 October 2023, the resident queried the grounds maintenance increase, communal utilities and health and safety charges. The landlord treated this as a dispute, acknowledged it on the same day and confirmed it would respond fully within 28 days. This transparency was reasonable so that it managed the residents’ expectations. The landlord provided its response on 26 October 2023; within the timeframe it had promised.
We have not seen a copy of this response; however, it prompted the resident to raise a formal complaint on 7 November 2023 as she did not receive the information she was seeking and reiterated her previous queries. We have not received any evidence of the response and have been unable to confirm whether the response was sufficient at this time.
However, we have assessed the landlord’s subsequent responses to her queries. For the grounds maintenance query, the landlord found that the time allocated for this was insufficient and needed to be increased from 30 to 80 minutes, per visit. It confirmed that its contractor is required to attend monthly between November and April and twice a month between May and October. We are therefore satisfied that the landlord reasonably explained the increase in the grounds maintenance charge and answered this query.
The resident also queried whether the service charge is the same for all of the properties or if they differ for each flat or block and whether someone visits the properties when determining the charges. In its stage 1 response on 23 November 2023, the landlord confirmed that the service charges are tailored to suit each flat and block, depending on the facilities that are in place and the required servicing and maintenance. It explained that its representative attends each estate to confirm what charges need to be applied to each property and block. We consider this to be a reasonable response and that the landlord adequately explained how it decides on the costs.
For the communal utilities, it explained that this charge is for communal electricity, which includes communal lighting in the block and the bin area. We consider that it acted reasonably in confirming this in its stage 1 complaint response. Nevertheless, it could have explained this earlier or included this in its service charge breakdown.
We note that the landlord also provided a copy of its latest fire risk assessment and confirmed that its estate services officer would attend monthly to report any required repairs.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord explained that notifying the resident of the increased service charge was sufficient consultation and gave the resident an opportunity to enquire or provide feedback. It provided its neighbourhood services contract which commits to consulting residents at all stages, and the tenancy agreement requires consultation before any management or maintenance changes that are likely to have a substantial effect on its tenants. On 1 October 2023, the resident’s service charge rose from £37.38 to £105.90, which was a substantial increase. Under the agreement, the landlord needed to explain what was changing and why, allowing the resident to raise concerns and then consider the feedback. Based on the evidence, we are satisfied the landlord acted in line with these obligations.
In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord explained the resident’s right to request its receipts and supporting documents for the service charges. It offered an appointment at her home or its office to view its 2022-2023 invoices and said copies could be provided. It confirmed she could view the 2023-2024 invoices once the financial year had ended. This was reasonable and gave clear options. The landlord could have confirmed this earlier, however, when the resident approached it with further queries after providing the summary of costs.
The resident also complained that services she paid for were not provided and the landlord has provided limited evidence to show they were carried out. Landlords should have a process for confirming services are being delivered and to the appropriate standard. They should have clear records to be able to demonstrate this when needed. The neighbourhood services contract says contractors must provide visit schedules and attendance sheets, but these have not been provided to the Service. There is also no evidence that the landlord presented these to the resident when she challenged the delivery of this service.
Following the complaints process, the landlord arranged works such as bulk waste removal in April 2024, gutter clearing in May 2024 and estate inspections in August and September 2024. The inspections found outstanding repair works and it acted reasonably by arranging for its contractor to resolve the issues. While we have received limited information on any prior site visits and inspections, this shows a willingness from the landlord to make some improvements and that it is taking action.
Based on everything we have seen, the landlord may have avoided escalation to its complaint process if it had been more forthcoming and prompter with the information requested. It could have gone further to demonstrate that it was taking the resident’s concerns seriously by evidencing the services delivered. In our view, this was a failure in service.
The landlord has not offered any compensation for this complaint point, and we think compensation is appropriate, given the distress, inconvenience and the resident’s reduced confidence in the landlord. We therefore order the landlord to pay the resident £100 which is in line with our remedies guidance where there has been a failure by the landlord and it has not appropriately acknowledged it.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

The Service’s complaint handling code (“the Code”) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The resident formally complained on 7 November 2023, and the landlord acknowledged it on 9 November 2023, which was within the timeframe set out in the Code. It advised that it would provide its stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days, no later than 23 November 2023. It also set out its understanding of her complaint, which was reasonable.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 23 November 2023, within the expected timeframe. It is unclear when the resident first escalated her complaint to stage 2, however, the landlord sent its acknowledgement on 19 December 2023 and confirmed it would respond by 18 January 2024. This did not happen, and the resident had to request intervention from the Ombudsman service. This prompted the landlord to provide a second acknowledgement on 1 March 2024, and it issued its stage 2 complaint response on 8 March 2024.
The landlord’s application of its internal complaints process caused unreasonable delays for the resident. The Ombudsman recognises that the landlord offered £300 compensation for its complaint handling failures. As the landlord has admitted its failings, we have considered whether the redress offered by the landlord puts things right. The landlord’s offer of £300 is above what the Ombudsman would typically award for the failings identified. We therefore think the landlord has taken reasonable steps to put things right and made an offer of redress which resolves this element of the complaint satisfactorily.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord should ensure that it and its contractor comply with the terms of the Neighbourhood Services Contract, including that its contractors complete a schedule of visits and attendance sheets so that it can demonstrate that works have been completed.

Communication

The landlord should ensure it provides clear information to its residents and responds to the specific concerns being raised.