Karibu Community Homes Limited (202345962)

Background

1. The resident is a shared owner with an assured tenancy and he moved into the property in April 2023. The property is a 1-bedroom flat within a block. The resident pays the landlord a monthly service charge, and the landlord has appointed a managing agent to oversee the day-to-day maintenance of the block, including communal areas. In April 2024 the landlord merged with another organisation and changed its name.

What the complaint is about

2. The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of his request for meter readings.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for meter readings.
5. There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

6. In summary, the Ombudsman found that the landlord:
   1. failed to keep clear records of its discussions with its managing agent
   2. failed to obtain clear repair records relating to the meter room keypad repair
   3. did not make it clear to the resident who was responsible for getting meter readings
   4. did not keep the resident updated about the meter room keypad repair
   5. did not respond to all the resident’s calls
   6. did not respond to all points of the resident’s complaint

We have ordered the landlord to do a learning lessons review on these points in our orders.

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.

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.

7. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for maintenance of communal areas including any installation for the supply of gas and electricity. It is also responsible for communal doors, wiring and electrics. As the resident is a shared owner, he pays service charges to the landlord for the upkeep of these communal areas.
8. Although the landlord outsourced the building management to an agent, it was still responsible for the meter room and associated door entry system. It was also responsible for monitoring the managing agent’s performance. This includes acting if the agent did not meet their contractual requirements.
9. The landlord told us that it could not find any records relating to communication with the managing agent from the period investigated. It believed communication was over the phone, however, it could not say what was discussed.
10. There is no record of when the managing agent repaired the keypad. We therefore cannot determine when the resident had access to the meter room to collect his own readings. The landlord confirmed to us that as of the date of this report the resident has access to the meter room.
11. There is no record of when the landlord agreed to provide meter readings instead of the resident getting them directly from the meters. The landlord confirmed to us that this service is not included in its service charges. However, based on emails provided to us, the landlord was providing readings to the resident through his letterbox from the time he moved in. It was reasonable that he would expect this to continue.
12. The resident told the landlord multiple times that he was concerned that he would not be able to pay his bills based on the estimates reached by the energy company. He said that the situation had led to stress and worry, and that he was increasingly frustrated by the lack of communication. The landlord did not mention this in its complaint responses or in other communications with the resident. It should have considered whether it could signpost the resident to support services.
13. We can also see that the resident had to repeatedly chase the landlord for his meter readings. There is no evidence that each contact attempt resulted in a call back, so it is understandable that this was frustrating for him.
14. The landlord agreed that its communication was not to the required standard and apologised. However, it did not set any expectations about how the resident would get his meter readings moving forward. It should have clarified who was responsible for gathering the readings.

15. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) 1 April 2024 requires landlords to acknowledge a complaint or escalation request within 5 working days. Landlords must issue a stage 1 response within 10 working days of acknowledging the complaint. They must also issue a stage 2 final response within 20 working days of an escalation acknowledgement. The landlord acknowledges these expectations within its complaints policy.
16. The landlord sent its stage 1 and 2 acknowledgements and responses on time. This was consistent with the Code. However, the stage 2 response was incomplete. It did not address the resident’s complaint about the keypad to the meter room being broken. This meant that it failed to formally address or resolve a large part of the resident’s complaint.
17. The landlord awarded compensation of £211 at stage 1 which was consistent with our remedies guidance. However, it did not say specifically what the compensation was for. We have not seen evidence that the resident accepted the compensation, so have included it in our order.
18. The complaint response did not specify whether this was a goodwill gesture for overall service failures, or a payment for half of the resident’s energy bills in line with his previous request.
19. Both options are reasonable and at the landlord’s discretion but it should have made it clear what the compensation was for. As we have not seen any conclusive evidence or breakdown of payment we cannot determine whether the landlord considered compensation for the communication issues experienced by the resident or for the length of time that the keypad was broken.

Learning

20. We’ve asked the landlord to conduct a learning review based on the findings in this report.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

21. There is a lack of evidence of discussion between the landlord and managing agent about the keypad. The landlord told us that it believes that conversations took place over the phone but those staff members have left the organisation. The landlord should ensure that it keeps clear written records of verbal conversations with residents and managing agents.
22. We issued a CHFO against the landlord in August 2024 as it did not provide requested evidence by the set deadline. The landlord later attributed the delay in responding to a lack of staffing. It should consider how it will maintain its complaint handling service during future periods of recruitment or low staffing.

Communication

23. The resident experienced difficulties reaching his housing officer over the phone and there is evidence that the landlord did not return some of his calls.
24. It is positive that the landlord acknowledged that staffing had an impact on its overall communication and that it committed to look at improvements to its service. It is not clear to us whether it made any changes. We expect that the lessons learned review will highlight any changes following this complaint.