London Borough of Croydon (202008020)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202008020

Croydon Council

26 October 2021


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 reports about how it handled her rent and council tax accounts, following a decant from her permanent property.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord at the property (‘the permanent property’). Between August 2019 and November 2020, she was decanted to a temporary property (‘the temporary property’) whilst major works took place. The substance of this complaint relates to issues pertaining to the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about her rent and council tax accounts during her occupation of the temporary property. The landlord has confirmed that the decant was originally intended to commence in July 2019, but that this was delayed as the resident had requested that the temporary property be redecorated before she took up occupation.
  2. The landlord has confirmed that its standard process at the time of this complaint for a decant included informing the resident that the rent account for their original property will be frozen, then reinstated when they move back in. The landlord has confirmed that it did not have a specific guidance document outlining a resident’s responsibility to pay rent and other household bills when decanted, though it confirmed that its sign–up pack ‘clearly states that residents are responsible for the payment of rent/fuel supplies etc’ and that it is the resident’s responsibility to inform council tax of any relevant changes.
  3. The requirement to complete the decant works to the permanent property were the subject of a previous Ombudsman investigation (Ombudsman reference 201813743). This previous investigation also identified that there was a lack of transparency about expenses the landlord would cover in relation to the move and recommended that the landlord introduce a decant policy. The Ombudsman also identified that the landlord had agreed to re-decorate the temporary property, despite this being resident responsibility under the terms of the tenancy agreement.
  4. In addition, the resident has raised a new complaint, with both the landlord and with this Service, in relation to the works completed at the permanent property during the decant (Ombudsman reference 202109511). The landlord sent its final response to this complaint in February 2021, and it is currently progressing through the Ombudsman’s formal investigation process. It is encouraging to note that the landlord provided the resident with its new decant policy as part of its final response to this complaint.
  5. It is clear from the evidence provided to this investigation that the resident’s complaint included dissatisfaction with how the landlord responded to her reports about her Council Tax account, both during and following the completion of the landlord’s complaints process. This included concerns about her Council Tax liability and her Council Tax Support (CTS) entitlement. As a Local Authority, the landlord has a statutory duty to provide these services locally, however, these are not elements of its service delivery that would fall to be considered by the Ombudsman, whose role is limited to consideration of a Local Authority’s actions from a housing management perspective.
  6. As such, this investigation is limited in the extent to which it will reference, or investigate, the resident’s reports about her Council Tax account. The landlord’s communication with the resident on this issue during the complaints process will be considered, but actual amounts that have been billed, or how the CTS entitlement has been calculated have not been investigated. Should the resident have ongoing concerns on these issues then she has the option of approaching the Valuation Tribunal Service.
  7. The tenancy agreement for the temporary property was signed on 16 July 2019, with a start date of 22 July 2019. The agreement confirms the weekly rent of £126.92 per week from that point. The resident also signed a New Tenant Sign-Up – Key Receipt document and a Statement of Occupation document on 16 July 2019 that confirmed that rent payments were due from the tenancy start date at the temporary property. The landlord has also provided an Accommodation Sign Up Checklist in relation to the temporary address, this document requires the landlord officer to confirm that a series of steps have been taken in relation to the move, including explaining the license agreement, confirming the charges for the property, issuing a list of utility suppliers and explaining responsibility for paying utility bills. The copy of this document that was made available to this investigation is incomplete, with the checklist not filled in and the document unsigned.
  8. The tenancy agreement does not confirm repair/maintenance responsibility for the temporary property. The landlord is required, in accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to repair and maintain the structure and exterior of the property, as reflected in the landlord’s Condition of Tenancy document, which also confirms the resident’s responsibility for internal repair/maintenance of any issues that do not come under the Act, the tenancy conditions document also confirms resident responsibility for re-decoration.

Summary of Events

  1. The tenancy at the temporary property commenced on 22 July 2019, however, the resident did not take up occupation until 13 August 2019 as she delayed moving in whilst some works and full re-decoration took place. The resident emailed the landlord on 4 November 2019. She said that she had been advised that she would not be responsible for the council tax and rent at the temporary property and that she should continue to pay rent for her permanent property. She was dissatisfied to have received rent demands for the temporary property and for the landlord’s failure to respond to previous correspondence on this issue during August and September. It is not known what, if any, response the resident received to this contact.
  2. The resident emailed the landlord on 2 March 2020. She referred to telephone discussions she had with the landlord the previous week, reiterated her view that she did not have a rent liability whilst resident at the temporary property and questioned why monies she had paid to her permanent property rent account had been transferred to the rent account for the temporary property. On 6 March, she emailed again as she had received a hand delivered note from the landlord requiring her to make contact to avoid her tenancy ending. She said that she had contacted, as requested, though it was not clear whom she should be contacting and had spent a long time trying to get through. When she had got through, the staff member had been ‘dismissive’ of her statement that the landlord was ‘trying to kill’ her. She was dissatisfied to be informed that there would not be an issue if she paid rent to her rent account, stating that the staff member had no regard for her mental health. She requested a refund of all monies she had paid to her permanent rent account and confirmed that this was a formal complaint.
  3. Following a telephone call with the resident on 9 March 2020, the landlord’s Housing team sent an email to its Revenues team, explaining that the resident wanted to continue making payment to her permanent property Council Tax account. It asked that the resident not be charged whilst in occupation at the temporary property. The landlord’s Revenues team responded on 11 March 2020, to confirm that legislation required the resident to be registered for both properties, though it was possible to arrange to send the relevant bill direct to the Housing team.
  4. The landlord sent its stage one complaint response on 17 March 2020. It said that:

a)     It was standard practice to freeze the rent account on a permanent property during a decant period and for a tenant to be liable for rent payments at their temporary property.

b)     The member of staff who would normally manage the rent account was absent, hence a duty officer picking up this work. It confirmed it was not standard practice to inform residents about such staffing changes due to costs. It apologised for any difficulties she had experienced in getting through to an income officer through its telephony system.

c)     It had discussed the resident’s concerns with the staff member involved, who had disputed that he had been dismissive during their discussion. He said that he had asked her about comments she had made and informed her that she had received a rent arrears letter due to non–payment of rent.

d)     It had arranged with the water company for it to pay her water costs at the temporary property whilst she remained in occupation.

e)     It clarified that it had sent rent arrears letters for the temporary property on both 12 and 19 August 2019, though she had only moved in on the 13th August. It had also noted that the rent freeze on the permanent property had dropped off during October 2019. To remedy this situation, it agreed a credit of 9 weeks to be applied to the permanent property rent account, with some of this money to be used to offset arrears at the temporary property.

  1. The resident responded to the landlord on 22 April 2020. She said that she understood there to be a period when she was being charged rent for both properties, asked if her previous emails/phone calls had been picked up by staff members and disputed the landlord’s position regarding the call she had with its staff member. She disagreed that he had been attempting to assist and said that he had shown ‘insensitivity’, ‘incompetence’ and had no interest ‘in being compassionate’. She asked for clarity regarding the start and end dates for rent payments for the two properties, raised concerns about her CTS entitlement and asked when the 9 weeks rent credit would be applied to her rent account. She also requested escalation of her complaint.
  2. The landlord responded the same date. It confirmed that a rent allowance of £1,484.26 had been applied to her rent account, calculated from 22 July 2019. It said that she had been decanted with effect from 13 August 2019 and this meant that she had effectively been awarded three weeks of rent as a goodwill gesture. It also said that it had previously agreed that the housing team would pick up the council tax costs at the temporary property, however, its Revenues team had confirmed that this was not its standard practice. It also confirmed that it had arranged for the water company to bill the Housing team directly for her water costs whilst at the temporary property.
  3. The resident responded on the same date. She questioned why the £1,484.26 had been transferred from the permanent property rent account to the temporary property rent account as she had not been informed about this and had requested a refund of these monies. She also asked why she continued to receive Council Tax bills given that the Housing team had agreed to pick up these costs.
  4. The landlord responded on 28 April 2020. It corrected the rent credit it had detailed in its previous correspondence (£1,641.77, not £1484.36), and confirmed that this had resulted in a £378.87 goodwill gesture as her rent allowance had been calculated from 22 July 2019.
  5. The landlord’s Revenues team responded to an internal email on 4 May 2020. It confirmed that the two properties were of the same banding so there was no financial cost to the resident. It confirmed that the council tax account for the permanent property had been put into the landlord’s name whilst repairs were completed and that the resident would receive Council Tax bills for the temporary property from 13 August 2019.
  6. The landlord asked the resident (4 May 2020) to clarify the issues that remained outstanding from her complaint.  On 7 May, she said that her issues with her rent and Council Tax accounts had not been resolved, as she had requested a ‘logical and methodical approach’ which had not been applied, leaving her with debits on her accounts. She also:

a)     Questioned the £378.87 goodwill gesture detailed above, of which she had not been consulted and said that she would not choose for such compensation to be credited to her rent account.

b)     Said that she had not been informed about the transfer of monies from one rent account to the other.

c)     Asked why she continued to receive Council Tax bills for both properties and questioned her CTS entitlement.

d)     Asked why the water company continued to bill her at both properties.

  1. The landlord’s Revenues team emailed the resident on 12 May 2020, providing her with an updated summary of her Council tax liability following the change in property from 13 August 2019. The resident responded to this email on 14 May 2020, though this has not been referenced further here as it relates to her Council Tax liability, an issue that is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  2. Internal landlord correspondence dated 26 May 2020 confirmed that the permanent property rent account had been charged incorrectly between 12 August 2019 and 14 October 2019, totalling 10 weeks at £126.29 per week. This was rectified by adding a rent allowance totalling £1641.77 (13 weeks between 22 July 2019 and 14 October 2019), meaning that the resident benefitted from the goodwill gesture detailed in the stage one complaint response of £378.87. the landlord also identified a single point of contact for the resident’s rent enquiries.
  3. The landlord sent its stage two (final) response on 4 June 2020. It confirmed that it was the resident’s responsibility to ensure that she made payment to the appropriate rent/council tax account and, though it had made transfers on this occasion as a goodwill gesture, it would require her to seek a refund in future as this was its standard procedure. Nonetheless, it apologised for any ‘confusion or worry caused’. The landlord responded under three headings:
  4. Rent – The new agreement signed by the resident when she moved to the temporary property clearly identified that she was required to pay rent whilst resident. It apologised however, as it could not confirm that she had been provided with the account number for this property, though it identified that this reference number had been supplied with rent statements it had sent her in August 2019. It confirmed that it was standard practice to freeze the rent account at the permanent property in decant cases and also identified that she was still paying her rent to the permanent property rent reference number. The landlord confirmed that it had sent arrears letters in respect of the temporary property due to this issue and also acknowledged that the freeze on the permanent property had ‘dropped off’, an error for which it had credited the account with £378.87 as compensation.
  5. Council Tax – The landlord confirmed that the council tax account for the permanent property was inactive whilst she was decanted and it had transferred her payments to the active account on the temporary property. The landlord also responded to the resident’s concerns about her CTS payments, confirming that its benefits team had reassessed the case twice in April 2020 on account of income changes and that it had asked its Quality and Service Improvement Team to provide her with a detailed breakdown of her entitlement. The landlord also confirmed the resident’s outstanding balance, including monthly payment amounts.
  6. Water rates – The landlord confirmed that, given the circumstances of the case, it had agreed to pay her water bill for the temporary property for the entire time she remained resident.
  7. On 5 June 2020, the landlord’s Revenues Team sent the resident a full statement of account for both her Council Tax liability and CTS entitlement covering 2019/20 and 2020/21.
  8. Following the completion of the complaints process, the resident continued to chase progress on her outstanding Council Tax liability and CTS issues. These have not been referenced any further for jurisdictional reasons. On 20 May 2021, in a call with this Service, the Ombudsman’s limited role with respect to Council Tax issues was explained; the resident confirmed her desired outcome to be for the landlord to establish if any errors remain on either her rent or council tax accounts and for these to be corrected.

Assessment and findings

  1. It is evident that there were procedural issues with the landlord’s management of the decant from the permanent property. It failed to complete the sign-up checklist and it acknowledged that it failed to provide the resident with the rent account details for the temporary property. In addition, there is no evidence of a written response to the resident’s initial reports on this issue from November 2019. The resulting confusion and frustration on the resident’s part were therefore understandable. It is essential that a landlord’s procedures are followed in all aspects of its service delivery. In this instance, the sign-up checklist acts to ensure that the relevant aspects of the move are explained and understood by the moving party. This also provides the opportunity for the incoming resident to clarify their understanding and ask any questions.
  2. Whilst there is evidence that the landlord did not fully follow procedure at the point of sign up, it is clear from the documents signed by the resident on that date that there was a rent liability at the temporary property, which she would need to pay from that point. It is also clear from the fact that the resident continued to make payments from that point that she was fully aware that she retained a rent liability and that the confusion related to which rent account she should be making the payments towards.
  3. The resident submitted her formal complaint in March 2020, by this point she had been making payments to the incorrect rent account for a considerable period and had received notification from the landlord about possible possession action due to rent arrears. She also reported difficulties in getting through to the relevant staff member and frustration with how the call went when she eventually got through, feeling that the staff member had been quite dismissive of her.
  4. The landlord investigated the resident’s concerns about the telephone conversation she had with its staff member, including discussing the issue with the staff member himself. Having done so, it concluded that there had been no inappropriate actions. Whilst the resident clearly disagreed with this position, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to consider both sides and make a decision, on the balance of probabilities, on whether one party is more credible than the other. Having investigated and provided its reasoned response, the Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord has responded reasonably to this aspect of the complaint.
  5. The landlord’s stage one response was explicit in confirming that rent payments were required to the temporary property. This addressed the main point of concern for the resident, as she had understood that she should continue to make payment towards her permanent property. The landlord also identified the failure in freezing the rent account for the permanent property and identified redress by way of crediting the permanent rent account to negate its error. This presented as a reasonable solution to ensure that there was no financial impact on the resident.
  6. Prior to the final response, the landlord also clarified the start and end dates for each rent account, as requested by the resident. It also provided further details regarding the rent credit it would apply to the permanent account following its pay freeze error. This clarified that it had credited the account for the full period between 22 July 2019 (the date that the temporary tenancy commenced) and 14 October 2019, when it re-applied the account suspension. It confirmed that this effectively awarded £378.87, three weeks of rent, as a ‘goodwill gesture’ for its failure.
  7. This was effectively the landlord’s response to the enquiry the resident made about any period of overlapping rent liability, though it would have helped if it had been clear about this. The resident was liable for rent at the temporary property from the tenancy start date (22 July 2019) and would also have been liable for rent at the permanent property until the date she left (13 August 2019). This three week overlap was a period for which she was liable for payments – the landlord’s goodwill gesture meant that she did not incur a cost for this period. The resident stated that she would not choose to receive a compensation payment in this way, however, the Ombudsman recognises that landlord’s will often credit rent accounts with compensation. As with other aspects of its complaints response, it would have been helpful if the landlord had explained its reasoning here.
  8. The landlord’s Housing team also initially agreed to cover costs for both the resident’s water costs and Council Tax costs whilst at the temporary property. The decision to pay for the water bill demonstrated a reasonable exercise of discretion given the inconvenience the resident had no doubt experienced. Regarding Council Tax, the landlord’s Housing team liaised with its Revenues department and were informed that the resident would have to be made liable for the temporary property, though it was possible to bill the Housing team directly. The Housing team subsequently identified that there was no additional cost to the resident from the move, from a Council Tax perspective, as the banding for the two properties was identical. As such, its final response clarified that she should make payments to the active account for the temporary property. It is also noted that the resident also received a comprehensive summary of her 2019/20 and 2020/21 Council Tax accounts, including CTS entitlement, from the Revenues team.
  9. There is evidence of continued dissatisfaction in respect of the Council Tax account (and CTS entitlement) following the end of the landlord’s complaints process. For the reasons outlined above, these have not been referenced here.
  10. Whilst the landlord’s responses lacked clarity at times and there is concern that it did not follow procedure at the sign-up stage, the Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord decision to award compensation as a goodwill gesture, and its decision to fund water charges at the temporary property, provided reasonable redress for the failures identified. The landlord also responded to the queries she had raised about staffing and investigated her reports about the telephone conversation she had. There is evidence that it has also now implemented a decant policy, in accordance with the recommendations from the previous Ombudsman investigation, demonstrating a degree of learning from the complaint raised.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered reasonable redress for the service failures identified with its response to the resident’s reports about her rent/council tax accounts.

Reasons

  1. The landlord acknowledged that it had failed to provide relevant information at the sign-up to the temporary property and that it had failed to suspend the permanent property rent account. It also agreed to fund the resident’s water bill at the temporary property, confirmed the requirement for the resident to make payment to the temporary account whilst in occupation at the temporary property and responded to the staffing issues she raised as part of the complaint.
  2. The landlord initially offered to cover payments towards the resident’s Council Tax bill for the temporary property, but amended this position following information it received from the Revenues team that the decant would not affect the resident’s Council Tax. Whilst the landlord’s response on this issue could have been clearer, there is no evidence of a detriment to the resident.
  3. The amount of compensation awarded by the landlord was reasonable and proportionate to the service failures identified. Whilst the resident might have chosen to receive compensation via an alternative method, the landlord’s decision to offset the payment against the resident’s rent account was reasonable as it prevented arrears accruing on the account. Whilst this was a reasonable decision, the landlord’s complaint responses could have provided more clarity on its reasoning for taking this course of action, however alone this omission does not amount to a service failure.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendation

  1. The landlord to review the service failure identified with its sign-up process and to provide training for any staff members who might benefit.