Newham Council (202127130)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202127130

Newham Council

23 June 2022


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 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 handling of the resident’s request for his tenancy to be changed from joint to sole.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord who has had a joint tenancy with his ex-wife since 9 December 2013.
  2. The resident reported that he was advised by the landlord on 21 October 2021 that he would be contacted by it regarding changing his tenancy from joint to sole. He stated that he received no contact from about this, however, and so he sent it emails on 2 and 19 November 2021 seeking an update, and also left messages for it on a switchboard, but that he still received no response. The resident was therefore dissatisfied with the lack of contact from the landlord, and with the poor-quality service that he described receiving from it, as his tenancy status was affecting his right to buy application. Due to his concerns, he raised a stage one complaint with it on 6 December 2021.
  3. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 19 January 2022, and it informed the resident that it had sent emails to him, but that it had received no response, and so it had called him on 17 January 2022 to explain the process of him becoming a sole tenant. It further added that, since he had said that he was unable to contact his ex-wife, he should seek legal advice on ending his joint tenancy.
  4. The resident responded by making a final stage complaint on 21 January 2022, in which he considered that the landlord was not taking accountability for the poor level of service that he reported that he had received from it. He added that it had contacted him via an old email address, had only attempted to call him once in December 2021, and that January 2022 was the only time that he had been able to make contact with it. The resident was also dissatisfied that he and his ex-wife were given incorrect advice on ending their joint tenancy via her requesting this directly, and that the landlord had failed to inform him that she had contacted it to confirm that she was happy to do so.
  5. In its final stage complaint response of 11 February 2022, the landlord explained that it had sent a notice to quit form to the resident’s wrong email address, but that it had re–sent this to the correct one on 24 December 2021. All the relevant forms to end his joint tenancy were described by it as having then been completed on 24 January 2022, and it explained that, on 21 February 2022, he would become a sole tenant as a result of the expiry of the notice to quit.
  6. The landlord was satisfied that its stage one and final stage complaint responses were dealt with appropriately by it, but it acknowledged the delays in its communication with the resident about his tenancy between October and December 2021, and the time taken for him to pursue the complaint about this. As redress, it offered him £100 compensation for this, and it explained that it would amend his tenancy status and send him confirmation of this on 21 February 2022.
  7. The resident accepted the offer of £100 compensation but, on 9 March 2022, he contacted the landlord querying why the confirmation of his tenancy status and the £100 compensation had not been received by him. He subsequently received the compensation on 16 March 2022, but he stated that he was unhappy with the delay in this, and that he was still awaiting confirmation of his tenancy status.
  8. Remaining dissatisfied, the resident brought his complaint to this Service to investigate, and we confirmed that we could only look at the landlord’s handling of his sole tenancy request, and not his right to buy application. It then contacted us to explain that it would award him a further £100 compensation for its subsequent delays, and that it would contact him to resolve the joint to sole tenancy application on 8 April 2022, backdating this to 21 February 2022.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident had a reasonable expectation that he would be contacted by the landlord to update him on his tenancy status in October to November 2021, after he asked for this to be changed from joint to sole. This is because it informed him that it would do so on 21 October 2021. The landlord failed to meet this expectation, however, causing the resident to email it on 2 and 19 November 2021, as well as leave messages on the switchboard, chasing it for an update. It should have instead managed his expectations about this, and contacted him with an update, removing the need for him to pursue a complaint. To learn from this outcome and prevent future difficulties, it is recommended below that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to tenancy changes communication.
  2. Furthermore, the landlord’s notice to quit form, which was required to assist with removing the resident’s joint tenancy, was sent to the wrong email address by it. This error caused an avoidable delay in his tenancy being updated, causing him distress. It was therefore appropriate for the landlord to recognise its mistake in doing so, and to re–send the document to the correct email address for the resident on 24 December 2021.
  3. However, it would have been helpful if the landlord had contacted the resident to confirm his contact details before sending him the notice to quit form, as this would have avoided unnecessary delays in him receiving this. To prevent this from happening again, it is recommended below that it l remind its staff to always confirm that contact details are up to date before sending residents relevant legal documents.
  4. This Service’s remedies guidance states that compensation is appropriate in cases where there is a “duration of any avoidable distress or inconvenience”, including from £50 for repeated failures to reply to correspondence or calls or not having regard to residents’ preferred contact method. On 11 February 2022, the landlord initially offered the resident £100 compensation for its communication delays and its stage one complaint response being nine working days later than its corporate complaints policy’s 20-working day timescale, and it agreed to confirm his sole tenancy status on 21 February 2022. However, the compensation, which had been in line with our remedies guidance, arrived later than expected on 16 March 2022, and he did not receive confirmation of his tenancy status, causing him additional distress.
  5. The landlord, however, acted appropriately by then awarding the resident a further £100 compensation to reflect the subsequent delays in accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance, and it advised him that it would contact him to resolve the joint to sole tenancy application on 8 April 2022, backdating this to 21 February 2022. Therefore, its actions in response to its failings were proportionate redress for any detriment experienced by him from its delays and poor communication.
  6. As a consequence, the landlord has been recommended below to pay the resident the £100 further compensation that it previously offered him, and to contact him to resolve the status of his sole tenancy application, if it has not already done so. It has also been recommended below to review its corporate complaints policy to ensure that this complies with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, which requires stage one complaints to be responded to within ten working days, unlike the 20 working-day timescale in the policy.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of his request for his tenancy to be changed from joint to sole satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to tenancy changes communication.
    2. Remind its staff to always confirm that contact details are up to date before sending residents relevant legal documents.
    3. Pay the resident the £100 further compensation that it previously offered him, if it has not already done so.
    4. Contact the resident to resolve the status of his sole tenancy application, if it has not already done so.
    5. Review its corporate complaints policy to ensure that this complies with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords-info/complaint-handling-code/.