Midland Heart Limited (202011922)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202011922

Midland Heart Limited

8 September 2021


Our approach

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this. 

In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns with the level, and standard of work carried out in relation to his service charges.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  1. 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.
  2. After carefully considering all the evidence, we have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary of events

  1. The resident is leaseholder of the landlord. He pays a service charge for grounds maintenance, a staff phone, and the maintenance of fire equipment (including emergency lighting).
  2. The resident raised a formal complaint to the landlord on 15 November 2020 about “the unrealistic service charges for the work that [was] carried out” (this is understood to be in relation to the grounds maintenance). He asked the landlord to provide phone logs to explain the charges incurred. He asked for the certificates for the emergency lighting.
  3. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 11 January 2021. It asked the resident to explain why he believed the grounds maintenance was not at the standard he expected. It said it could not provide phone logs for data protection reasons. It said there had been an increase in phone usage due to the COVID-19 lockdown as the phone was the best way to contact residents. It provided a copy of the emergency lighting certificates. It concluded by explaining how the resident could escalate his complaint if he remained dissatisfied. 
  4. The resident escalated his complaint on 12 January 2021. He noted occasions throughout 2019 and 2020 when he believed grounds maintenance had not been done. He said when they had attended “very little to none of the work [was] carried out” when considered against the grounds maintenance specifications. He reiterated his request for phone logs. He was concerned that not all calls were to residents. He said he had looked at the costs for emergency lighting, and queried whether the residents were getting value for money.
  5. The landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 9 February 2021. It said it had investigated the resident’s concerns with grounds maintenance in 2019, and issued a service charge refund. It reiterated that there had been a higher number of calls as it had reduced personal contact, and because most of its staff were working from home. It said that when it renewed its contract for emergency lighting, it sought to obtain the best value for money, and also excellent service.

Reasons

  1. Under paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman will not consider complaints which “concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure”.
  2. It is apparent from the resident’s complaints and correspondence that among other issues, his fundamental concerns are the standard and quality of work from grounds maintenance, the costs incurred from the staff phone, and the landlord’s appropriateness of the costs of the emergency lighting.
  3. Complaints that relate to the level, reasonableness, or liability to service charges are more appropriately dealt with by the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). The Tribunal has the specialised remit, experience, and legal powers to better resolve such disputes. The Tribunal can look at whether the quality of service proposed or completed was reasonable, and carried out in line with the required standards. They can also examine the landlord’s procedures for assessing and controlling their costs. Because of that, and in accordance with paragraph 39(i), this complaint is better considered by the Tribunal.