Hyde Housing Association Limited (202230534)

Decision
Case ID	202230534
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Hyde Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	28 November 2025

Background

The resident has a variable service charge arrangement, and so the landlord provides an estimated service charge at the beginning of each financial year, and the statement of actual expenditures for reconciliation in September of each year. Residents have the right to query any over or underspending.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Assertion that the service charges were not payable.
2. Request for a summary of accounts.
3. Subsequent request to inspect receipts.
We have also investigated the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

The complaint about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s assertion that the service charges were not payable is outside of the Housing Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a summary of accounts.
There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s subsequent request to inspect receipts.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

We have made an order for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The complaint about whether the service charges were payable

Section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 gives the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) the power to decide whether a service charge is payable. This matter is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a summary of accounts

The landlord acknowledged the delay in providing the resident with the summary of the accounts. It apologised, offered compensation, and identified learning to prevent recurrences.

The resident’s subsequent request to inspect receipts

There is no evidence that the landlord withheld information from the resident.

The associated complaint

The landlord exceeded the timeframes set within its complaints policy for stage 1 and 2 complaint responses. It also failed to recognise the delays in responding to the complaint, in both stages of its internal complaint process.

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
	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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 06 January 2026
1	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. 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 06 January 2026

Order

What the landlord must do

Due date

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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic.
It has due regard to our apologies guidance.

No later than

06 January 2026

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling.

This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. 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

06 January 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
20 July 2022	In her stage 1 complaint, the resident said that she had requested a written summary of the account, which the landlord failed to provide within the statutory 30-day timeframe. She requested the landlord to provide receipts as evidence that it had paid the invoices, when it had supplied her with the summary of accounts. She said the landlord had told her it did not have this information. Meanwhile, the arrears on her service charge account accumulated, and the landlord demanded that she pay the arrears or stated that it would initiate legal proceedings.
24 February 2023	In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord: Acknowledged the delay in sending the invoice pack. It apologised and explained that this was due to internal miscommunication. It said it would provide additional staff training to prevent recurrence. It offered £50 in compensation to account for these delays. Said that the information it had provided to the resident was a complete and accurate record of the costs incurred and paid for the resident’s property during the accounting period 2019/2020. This fulfilled its obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act. Explained that many of its contractors deliver services across various areas. It said they send invoices and receive payments electronically, meaning there was rarely a physical stamp or record of payment.
4 March 2023	The resident asked us to investigate her complaint. We had contacted the landlord on 9 January 2024 to request its final response letter, which it issued on 25 January 2024, repeating its stage 1 letter.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident told us on 16 February 2024 that she withheld payment of the overspent amount because the landlord could not provide evidence of its overspending, which has now accumulated to £1,400. She said the landlord told her it would take legal action while she had been waiting for this investigation. In later correspondence, she said the landlord reviewed and reduced the 2024/2025 estimates for the block from £18,963.02 to £1,500. She said that, as the landlord’s estimates were based on the average of previous years’ actual service charges, this indicated errors in those years, which she was unable to verify without the information she had requested.

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 on whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s assertion that the service charges were not payable.
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

The residents withheld her payments on the basis that she did not believe the landlord had complied with her request for information. We do not investigate complaints where it would be quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the court, tribunal or other procedure. In this case, the complaint about whether the service charges payable is better dealt with by the court/tribunal because Section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 gives the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) the power to decide whether a service charge is payable. This matter is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
Should the resident wish to pursue this, she is advised to seek independent legal advice.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a summary of accounts
Finding	Reasonable redress

Section 21 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘the Act’) gives leaseholders the right to request the landlord to provide a summary of the service charge costs. Section 21 is prescriptive and encompasses all documents related to the service charge demand, including invoices the landlord has received and whether they have been paid. The landlord must provide the summary within one month of the resident’s request.
The landlord accepted that it did not send the summary of charges to the resident within the statutory timeframe. Although the duration of the delay is disputed. The landlord apologised for the delay, offered compensation and took a learning point from the complaint in the form of staff training. These were appropriate steps to resolve this aspect of the complaint.

. Complaint	The resident’s subsequent request to inspect receipts.
Finding	No maladministration

Section 22 of the Act gives leaseholders the right to inspect documents related to the service charge. This can include invoices, accounts, receipts, and any other documents supporting the summary. Landlords do not have to provide information that they do not have on their system.
In this case, the resident said in her July 2022 complaint that she had received invoices from the landlord, but they lacked dates or stamps to verify payments. She said the landlord had told her it could not provide them because it did not have those details in its system.
In its February 2023 complaint response, the landlord explained that it received and paid invoices electronically, meaning there was rarely a physical stamp or record of payment. There is no evidence that this information was inaccurate, and therefore no evidence of maladministration.
Overall, the landlord accepted the delay in providing the resident with the information. It demonstrated that it followed the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, follow a fair process, and learn from the outcome. In our view, it acted in accordance with its obligations by sharing the information it had available to it for inspection.
We appreciate that the resident was seeking this information to be able to verify for herself that the costs passed on to her were justified. She may wish to approach the court or tribunal if she is still dissatisfied that the costs were reasonably incurred and properly evidenced.

Complaint	The handling of the associated complaint
Finding	Maladministration

The resident raised her stage 1 complaint on 20 July 2022. Against its target of responding within 10 working days, the landlord responded 153 working days later on 24 February 2023.
We contacted the landlord on 30 November 2023 and asked that it address the complaint at stage 2 and send its response by 2 January 2024. The landlord responded on 25 January 2024, which was a delay of 17 working days.
The landlord failed to recognise the delay in responding to the complaint at both stages of its internal complaint process. Its repeated failure to respond within the timescales set in its complaints policy demonstrates that its complaints process was not working effectively at that time.
When deciding an appropriate remedy to put things right, we have relied on our remedies guidance, and a compensation payment of £100 has been decided as appropriate in the circumstances. This amount falls within the maladministration banding of our remedies guidance and is to acknowledge the inconvenience caused by the delay in responding to the complaint within an appropriate time.

Learning

The landlord’s complaints process was not working effectively at the time of the resident’s complaint. It should consider whether it currently has sufficient measures to ensure it applies its complaint policy correctly and in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.