Magna Housing Limited (202403995)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202403995
Magna Housing Limited
21 March 2025
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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
- Reports that she was coerced into signing a letter to end her previous joint tenancy.
- Reports of domestic abuse (DA).
- Request for rehousing.
- We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.
Background
- The resident remains a joint tenant for a property she shared with her husband. She left the property in 2019 and lived in private rented accommodation until the landlord completed a management move in January 2025. She now has an assured tenancy in her sole name and lives in a 3-bedroomed house with two of her children.
- In February 2019, the resident told the landlord her husband had coerced her into signing a letter surrendering her part of the tenancy. The landlord gave advice on what to do in terms of her housing and relationship situation. In May 2021 the resident asked the landlord to help with rehousing and the landlord confirmed the local authority (LA) had a duty to rehouse her. It signposted the resident to support agencies and told her to apply to the LA for housing.
- In October 2022 the landlord was contacted by a support agency who asked if it would help rehouse the resident. It advised it could help with the application but confirmed the resident had to register with the LA. The same information and advice was given to a different support agency in October 2023 when the same request was made.
- The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 17 November 2023. She said:
- she had fled the home in February 2019 when pregnant due to abuse, and had been forced to sign a letter saying she wanted to be removed from the tenancy
- she told the landlord at the time she did not want to give up her tenancy and said she was not offered any advice on how to be rehoused, nor was she referred or told to self-refer herself to any DA charities
- in February 2021 she contacted the landlord and explained her situation but again was not offered any support, and stated she had been ill advised
- the landlord had told a DA support worker that the resident should remove her name from the tenancy and make a homeless application
- a different support agency had contacted the landlord who had said there was no evidence of DA, but when this was provided the landlord said it would not help her
- The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response (reference 5216) on 9 January 2024 which did not uphold the complaint. The landlord confirmed:
- it had not removed the resident’s name from the tenancy and an email sent at the time had confirmed this
- it had provided the resident with advice on agencies to refer herself to, advised her to seek legal advice about her tenancy, and advised her to make an application with the LA for housing
- the tenancy had not been considered by the courts, and it did not have the power to change a tenancy unless there was a court order or an agreement from both parties
- the resident could provide the court evidence to support her application for housing
- it provided further guidance on support and housing in 2021 and 2022 when the resident was advised to seek legal advice and to contact the LA as they had the duty to provide housing due to DA
- its role in the rehousing process was to work with the LA, however it could support with a housing application, give advice and work with third parties
- The resident escalated her complaint on 11 January 2024. She said the response was inaccurate and she had never been advised to go to external agencies and had ‘just been left.’ She named two other residents who she said have been given housing by the landlord outside of the housing register.
- The landlord provided its final complaint response on 16 April 2024 in which it did not uphold the complaint. The landlord confirmed:
- it had not removed the resident’s name from the tenancy in February 2019
- there was no hard evidence of the discussion from February 2019 but a follow up email in June 2019 confirmed the resident had been given advice on her tenancy and relationship situation at the time
- it had provided the correct advice to the resident’s support workers in October 2022 and 2023
- DA cases were referred to the Community Safety Team, but they did not rehouse residents and the team act as the link between the landlord and other agencies
- the two residents named had not been rehoused due to DA
- there had been confusion around the landlord’s role in rehousing the resident, but it would meet with the support agencies to resolve the situation
- The landlord continued with its offer of support and after receiving agreement from the resident a meeting was held on 8 July 2024. The landlord advised it needed to confirm the resident’s bedroom need and application status. It confirmed it did want to move her, but the application had to be done, and an extension had been given to allow the resident more time to obtain the information needed.
- It is noted the resident made a further complaint to the landlord in July 2024 regarding the landlord’s approach to a request for a managed move. In its response on 20 August 2024 the landlord confirmed as the resident was active on the housing register, it would monitor its empty homes for a management transfer. The evidence provided confirms a property was identified to meet the resident’s needs in an area of her choice and following major repairs, a new tenancy began on 2 January 2025.
Jurisdiction
- What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
- In the resident’s complaint she referred to the actions of the landlord that dated back to February 2019.
- Paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme states:
‘The Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising’.
- As there is no evidence to confirm the resident raised these matters with the landlord prior to 2024, and due to the time that has lapsed, the following elements of the complaint are outside of our jurisdiction and will not be assessed within this report:
- Reports that she was coerced into signing a letter to end her previous joint tenancy.
- Reports of domestic abuse.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- The resident has referred to the impact the situation has had on her health. Although we can consider the impact the situation has had on the resident and whether the landlord acted reasonably, we cannot determine liability for damage to health. This is a matter best suited to an insurance claim or court. Any compensation offer will be assessed in line with our remedies guidance. If the resident wishes to pursue this matter further, she should seek legal advice.
- The resident first raised a complaint with the landlord regarding its alleged lack of rehousing support and advice in November 2023, almost 4 years after the resident left her home. We expect a resident to raise concerns within a reasonable period which would normally be 12 months of the matters arising, therefore it is not appropriate to assess events dating back to 2019. Considering the evidence provided, we will on this occasion assess the landlord’s actions and communication on this subject from October 2022 to April 2024, the date of the final complaint response.
- Since the closure of the complaint outlined in the background section of this report, the resident raised a further complaint, plus other issues including the retrieval of belongings from her previous home, concerns over repairs in her new home and rent charges for her new home. For clarity, we can only investigate the issues that were raised in the complaint reference 5216. If the resident wishes to pursue any of the other matters, and if not done so already, she should raise a new complaint directly with the landlord.
Request for rehousing
- The landlord’s lettings policy 2019 stated:
- it will co-operate with the LA through the choice-based lettings scheme (CBL) which includes assisting with the LAs homelessness duties
- The landlord’s customer wellbeing and support policy (safeguarding, DA, and hoarding) states:
- the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 places a duty on the LA in England to provide housing-based support to survivors of DA and their children
- the landlord will offer support and advice on registering with the LA for rehousing and/or to make a housing application
- On 7 October 2022 a support agency asked the landlord if it would allocate the resident another property. The agency confirmed a previous discussion had taken place where the landlord had advised the resident needed to register with the LA, but it asked if a supporting court letter would secure a priority move without registering with the LA.
- Quoting the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, the landlord confirmed it was the LAs duty to provide housing-based support for survivors of DA. It advised it could assist in the form of advice on registering and/or making a homeless application and suggested the court letter be attached to the housing application. This was appropriate as it was in line with the landlord’s policy and responsibilities and gave clear guidance as to the action that was required.
- There is no evidence of any further contact with the landlord until 17 October 2023 when a different support agency spoke to the landlord about the resident’s housing situation. Although no evidence has been provided of this discussion, a follow up email from the agency suggests the landlord had said it could not prove or disprove the allegations of DA. On 19 October 2023 the support agency provided evidence of the DA and asked the landlord if it could offer housing support other than suggesting she seeks legal advice.
- On 31 October 2023 the landlord demonstrated empathy to the situation and the impact the experiences had on the resident, but it confirmed that the information and advice it had given previously regarding her rehousing was correct. It provided further advice on what the resident should do if she was experiencing DA at that time. This was appropriate. While the landlord’s actions and advice reflected its policy, it recognised the impact on the resident and offered advice and guidance.
- In the resident’s stage 1 complaint she said the landlord had told her to remove her name from the tenancy and to make a homeless application. The landlord advised she was told in October 2022 to contact the LA regarding housing and that it could assist with a housing application or a homelessness application. From the evidence seen, while the landlord acknowledged the resident had been through a tough time, at no point did it tell the resident to register as homeless. It confirmed its role in the application process and the support it could offer. This was appropriate as it was in line with its policy and responsibilities.
- Following the escalation of the complaint, there is evidence of contact from the landlord to the resident when it asked for a list of names and contact details of the agencies she was involved with so it could arrange a multiagency meeting to bring the matter to a resolution. This was a reasonable step to take and demonstrated the landlord’s commitment to fulfilling its responsibilities and supporting the resident in finding accommodation.
- In its final complaint response on 16 April 2024, the landlord provided a copy of a follow up email that had been sent to the resident in June 2019 which confirmed the advice that had been given regarding housing in February 2019. It acknowledged the resident’s frustration but advised it had given the correct advice in the past and confirmed it was happy to support the resident to secure housing. It confirmed its suggestion of facilitating a multiagency meeting. This was appropriate as it was in line with the policy.
- In July 2024 after the closure of the complaint, a multiagency meeting was held. The landlord established the resident’s bedroom needs and application status. It advised a live housing application was needed before a property could be offered with either itself or the LA. It worked with the other agencies to ensure progress was made in registering an application. This was reasonable.
- In its complaint response in August 2024, the landlord confirmed the application was live and it was able to look for accommodation through a management move. In August 2024 the resident’s bedroom needs changed and while the landlord continued to look for properties, one became available in October 2024. Following major repair work the resident moved into her new home in January 2025.
- Considering the above and the evidence provided, the landlord has fulfilled its obligations in relation to provide rehousing support to the resident. As such, a finding of no maladministration is appropriate.
Complaint handling
- The landlord operated a 2-stage complaint policy that stated it would acknowledge complaints within 5-working days of receipt. It would respond to stage 1 complaints within 10-working days of the acknowledgement, and stage 2 complaints within 20-working days of receipt. If at any stage, further time was required, this would be communicated to the resident.
- Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states landlords should:
- acknowledge, define, and log stage 1 and 2 complaints within 5-working days of receipt
- issue a full response to stage 1 complaints within 10-working days of the acknowledgement, and within 20-working days of a stage 2 complaint escalation request
- decide whether an extension to these timescales is needed and inform the resident of the expected timescale for response. Any extension must be no more than 10-working days for stage 1 complaints (20 working days for stage 2 complaints) without good reason, and the reason(s) must be clearly explained to the resident.
- put things right via a number of actions which could include an apology, an acknowledgement and explanation when things have gone wrong, or an offer of financial remedy
- The landlord’s compensation policy states:
- compensation payments may be made in other circumstances, for example as a result of a formal complaint, where a customer has suffered inconvenience or distress, or we have provided a poor service and failed to put this right within a reasonable period of time
- The resident raised her complaint to the landlord on 17 November 2023. There is no evidence the landlord acknowledged its receipt. On 3 January 2024 the resident had to contact the landlord for an update on her complaint. She received an acknowledgement the same day, 30-working days after the complaint was raised. While the landlord apologised for the delay, the time taken to acknowledge the complaint was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy or the Code.
- The landlord responded to the complaint on 9 January 2024, 34-working days after it was made. While it addressed all the issues raised by the resident, the timescale to respond was not appropriate as it was not in line with its complaint policy. Further, the landlord failed to acknowledge the delay or offer any redress for the impact on the resident who had to spent time and effort chasing it for updates. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with the compensation policy or the Code.
- The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 11 January 2024. Although the landlord spoke to the resident on 12 January 2024 regarding her request, it did not acknowledge its receipt until 24 January 2024. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy, or the Code.
- On 21 February 2024 the landlord advised the resident it was unable to access her files which had been held in a secure location, and it aimed to respond by 27 February 2024. This was appropriate as it was in line with policy and the Code.
- By 29 February 2024 the resident had not received a response and had to contact the landlord for an update on her complaint which she highlighted had exceeded the amended date. The resident did not receive a response and on 26 March 2024 she was inconvenienced further when she had to chase the landlord again. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy.
- The landlord contacted the resident on 2 April 2024. It asked the resident for more information and suggested a revised response date of 16 April 2024. The landlord provided its final response on 16 April 2024, 67-working days after the escalation request. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy or the Code. The landlord did not offer an apology or explanation for the further delays, nor did it identify any learning to prevent a recurrence. It did not recognise the distress caused or time and effort spent by the resident pursuing a response. It did not offer any redress in recognition of its complaint handling failures.
- In failing to address these issues, the landlord did not demonstrate it had followed our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. As such, and for the reasons stated above, a finding of maladministration is appropriate.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme, the following elements of the resident’s complaint are outside of our jurisdiction.
- The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports that she was coerced into signing a letter to end her previous joint tenancy.
- The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of domestic abuse.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for rehousing.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.
Orders
- Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must provide evidence that it has:
- written a letter of apology to the resident that:
- addresses the failures highlighted in this report
- identifies any learning to prevent a recurrence
- paid the resident £150 for the time and trouble, and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s delays in the complaint handling process
- the payment should be made directly to the resident and not offset against any debt that may be owed
- written a letter of apology to the resident that: