Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) (202504863)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202504863 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Leaseholder |
|
Date |
23 June 2026 |
Background
- The resident queried his service charges with his landlord. He complained in March 2024 and said it had not responded to his service charge queries.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
- Service charge queries.
- Complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- We found reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
- Service charge queries.
- Complaint.
Summary of reasons
The landlord’s response to service charge queries
- The landlord delayed responding to the resident’s service charge queries. It recognised the delay at stage 1 and offered compensation. At stage 2 it offered further compensation for the time and trouble caused to the resident. The compensation was sufficient to put right the impact on the resident.
The landlord’s complaint handling
- The landlord did not comply with its complaint policy. It acknowledged this and offered compensation which was sufficient to put right the impact on the resident.
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the total £220 compensation offered to the resident. Our finding of reasonable redress for the failures in its response to the resident’s service charge enquiries and complaint handling is made on the basis the landlord pays him this compensation. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
29 March 2024 |
The resident complained to the landlord. He said he queried his service charges in September 2023, but it had not responded. He said he also asked it about a reimbursement on the account. He said the lack of response and incorrect arrears on his account had caused him stress. The resident chased the landlord for a response after 5 days. |
|
19 April 2024 |
The landlord replied at stage 1. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and upheld the resident’s complaint. It offered him £45 compensation broken down as:
|
|
12 June 2024 |
The resident escalated his complaint. He said there had been no progress on his service charge queries and the landlord had sent him an arrears notice. |
|
9 October 2024 |
The landlord replied at sage 2. It said it had been in communication with him about outstanding service charge issues. It said it arranged a meeting with all residents in the building for 15 October 2024. The landlord said it did not uphold the resident’s complaint about his service charge queries. However, it recognised the resident’s time and trouble spent trying to resolve his complaint. It offered £175 further compensation, broken down as:
|
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident said the landlord had resolved his service charge queries. He said he would like further compensation for the distress and inconvenience. |
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 |
The landlord’s response to the resident’s service charge queries |
|
Finding |
Reasonable redress |
What we did not investigate
- We do not investigate complaints about the level or increase of service charge. We have therefore not investigated this part of the resident’s complaint. The tribunal or court are more likely to be best placed to consider this matter, given their powers and expertise. However, we can consider whether the landlord has responded reasonably to the resident’s queries.
What we did investigate
- In September 2023, the resident queried his service charges with the landlord. He contacted it again in November 2023 when he did not receive a response. The landlord responded 16 days later and said the resident would get an update in March 2024.
- On 18 March 2024, the resident queried his service charges again to the landlord. He complained on 29 March 2024 due to the landlord’s lack of response to his queries.
- The landlord replied at stage 1 and said it explained the increase in the service charge to the resident. It said there was a reimbursement on his account for the cost of fire safety checks and numerous non-technical checks, which did not take place. It said it would contact him again to discuss the charges.
- The landlord’s stage 1 recognised the delay in responding to his queries and offered him £20 compensation. Its policy does not give amounts but says it will offer compensation if a resident has spent an unreasonable amount of time and trouble pursuing it because of a service failure.
- On 12 June 2024, the resident escalated his complaint and said the landlord had not responded to his queries. The landlord rearranged an all residents meeting to discuss the service charges to September 2024, due to resident availability. This was then rearranged for October due to repair works in the building.
- On 9 October 2024, the landlord replied at stage 2 and said it was in the process of dealing with the resident’s service charge queries. It said it had been in contact with the resident to discuss his enquiries between June and October 2024. It said it arranged a meeting with all residents in the block to discuss the service charges. It did not uphold this part of his complaint, but it offered £100 for his time and trouble. This was in line with its compensation policy.
- When a landlord has acknowledged failings, it is our role to consider whether the redress offered put things right for the resident. To do this we look at our dispute resolution principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
- The landlord acknowledged delays and offered a total of £120 compensation to put things right. This was in line with our compensation guidance for a failure that has adversely affected a resident. As such we find reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s service charge enquiries.
|
Complaint |
The landlord’s complaint handling |
|
Finding |
Reasonable redress |
- The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in the Code (April 2024). The timescales in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
- The resident complained to the landlord, after 5 days the resident chased it for a response, and it acknowledged the complaint the same day. It sent its stage 1 response within its policy time. At stage 1 it offered £25 for its poor complaint handling.
- The resident escalated his complaint and the landlord’s stage 2 response was delayed by around 2 months. It recognised this delay in its stage 2 reply, and it offered the resident a further £75 for poor complaint handling.
- The landlord did not comply with its complaints policy. However, it recognised this at stage 1 and 2 and offered compensation to try and put things right. The offer was in line with its compensation policy and our compensation guidance for a failure that has caused distress and inconvenience. As such, we find reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.
Learning
- The landlord should learn from this complaint and ensure it provides prompt, accurate and meaningful responses to complaints and enquiries.
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord failed to contact the resident following his initial service charge query. It should improve its record keeping, particularly by tracking outstanding actions and confirming it has provided responses to residents. Our 2023 spotlight reports on repairs, and knowledge and information management provide further guidance and recommendations in this area.
Communication
- The landlord’s complaint responses were detailed and empathetic.