Notting Hill Genesis (202001199)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202001199

Notting Hill Genesis

20 April 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:
    1. The landlord’s administration of the resident’s rent account.
    2. The landlord’s provision of service charge information.
    3. The landlord’s handling of the complaint. 

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of a two-bedroom flat owned and managed by the landlord. The property was let to the resident in April 2010.
  2. During the period concerned the resident was receiving housing benefit from the local authority which was paid directly to the landlord.
  3. The resident states that she suffers from anxiety and depression and this information was identified in her communications with the landlord.  

Policies, procedures, and legislation

  1. Income Collection Policy – this includes a number of statements regarding how the landlord will engage with a resident when they are in arrears, including:

‘Notting Hill Genesis will engage with residents if they fall into arrears.’

‘Have direct contact with residents at all stages of income collection. Use a variety of methods to contact residents; write to them, home visits, telephone contact, emails or texts.’

‘Support residents to maximise their income, through welfare benefits advice and support to access grants and benefits claims with expertise from Welfare Benefits Advisors.’

  1. Tenancy agreement – this confirms that a variable service charge is applicable for the property.
  2. Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – this covers administration of variable service charges including the provision of a right to request a summary of service charges. A landlord is required to provide this summary one month following the request or six months after the end of the relevant accounting period whichever is the later. 
  3. Service charge policy – the landlord’s website states that residents will be provided with a detailed breakdown of service charges with the yearly rent notice.  A landlord booklet ‘Understating your rent review’ also reiterates this stating under service charges that ‘You will have a detailed breakdown of these charges in your rent notice every year’. The landlord’s website also confirms that it will provide service charge statements annually usually six months after the end of the previous financial year.
  4. Complaints Policy – the landlord’s two stage complaint policy requires that complaints should receive a written response within 10 working days. If the complaint is escalated to a stage two review, then the landlord should send a final response within 20 working days. The policy also states:

‘Complaints should be made within a reasonable period which would normally be within six months of the matter occurring. In exceptional circumstances we may decide to respond to a complaint outside of this timescale.’

  1. Compensation Policy – the landlord’s compensation policy states:

‘Where you express dissatisfaction with a service failure, we can make a discretionary payment up to £250.This includes cases of inconvenience, hardship, distress or a ‘making good’ payment. These payments are made subject to supporting evidence or proof at our request. In some cases, it might be appropriate to offer higher levels of compensation than outlined above. These decisions must be approved by a senior manager.’

Summary of events

  1. At the end of May 2017, the resident had arrears of £262.73 on her rent account. The account shows that housing benefit was being paid directly into the rent account and that this was covering the full weekly rent. The landlord had a conversation with the resident on 21 June 2017 where it was confirmed that if the Council’s housing benefit department made the expected payment on 25 June 2017 the resident would remain £262.73 in arrears which would mean she would be ahead of the payments required by a court order obtained for previous rent arrears.   
  2. However, the level of housing benefit paid to the resident’s account at the end of June 2017 was at a reduced level. Housing benefit payments at reduced levels continued and arrears on the account rose as payments were not made by the resident to cover the shortfall. The landlord’s records show no communications with the resident regarding the rising arrears until a letter was sent on 14 March 2018. This letter confirmed that the resident was in breach of the court order and her arrears were £4546.95.
  3. On 21 March 2018, the resident contacted the landlord raising concern that she was not informed about the rise in arrears earlier. She confirmed she would be contacting the Council’s housing benefit department regarding the reduction in the amount she was paid.  On 11 April 2018, the resident confirmed to the landlord that she was disputing the housing benefit reduction with the Council.
  4. On 26 April 2018, the resident informed the landlord that she would be receiving housing benefit to cover her full rent going forward and that this would be backdated to Feb 2018. This reduced the arrears to £3672.50 on 30 April 2018. The resident confirmed that she was still disputing the reduction in housing benefits payments from June 2017, with the housing benefit department.
  5. The landlord sent letters to the resident on 8 June 2018 and 16 January 2019 requesting payments to bring the account balance in line with the court order. It also stated that if payment were not received it would apply to the Court for a date to obtain possession of her home. The letters did identify that ‘Should you be experiencing financial difficulties you can obtain independent advice and assistance from the local advice services detailed on the enclosed leaflet’.
  6. On 4 June 2019, the resident confirmed to landlord that she had applied for a Discretionary Housing Payment in March 2018 which was turned down. She confirmed she had appealed because she was not informed by the Council’s housing benefit department when her housing benefit was reduced in June 2017.  She identified that in May 2018 the housing benefit department responded that it was too late to apply for Discretionary Housing Payment and she was told that she needed to pay the arrears.
  7. On 7 June 2019, the landlord sent a further letter to the resident requesting payments to bring the account balance in line with the court order.
  8. The landlord records from 5 August 2019 confirm that the landlord’s Welfare Benefits Advice team were assisting the resident with a housing benefit appeal. 
  9. On 4 November 2019, the Council’s housing benefit department confirmed that following appeal (including consideration of medical evidence) they would be making payment of £1,592.54 which covered a period following late notification of a change of circumstances. The Welfare Benefit Advice team responded, asking for a breakdown of calculations for other periods when the arrears accrued as arrears still remained. It was later clarified that the housing benefit payments for the other periods were correct.
  10. On 25 February 2020, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord identifying that:
  • The landlord had failed to notify her of the changes to housing benefit payments and the arrears accruing on her account during the period of June 2017 to March 2018.
  • She had made every effort to get the matter resolved which had impacted on her depression and anxiety. That she was not made aware of the inhouse Welfare Benefits Advice team who could help with housing benefit issues –until a neighbour mentioned it to her in June 2019.  
  • She never received statements of her account unless she called to request them and had not received a breakdown in service charges for the past two years.
  • She met with a manager in June 2019 and the serious failings in the way her account had been handled were acknowledged by the manager.  
  • She had made contact several times over the past 6 months to request assistance from an Incomes Manager but had not been able to speak to one.
  • She would like a face–to–face meeting with a manager.
  1. On 28 February 2020, the landlord emailed the resident acknowledging the request for service charge accounts.
  2. On 3 March 2020, the resident submitted a further complaint raising concern that she had not received a response to the complaint made on 25 February 2020.
  3. On 16 April 2020, following the resident’s application for the Discretionary Housing Payment, made with the support of the landlord’s Welfare Benefits Advice team, the Council made a £2091.98 Discretionary Housing Payment to the resident’s rent account. This cleared the remaining arrears on the account.
  4. On the 27 April 2020, the resident emailed the landlord raising concern that she had still not received a response to her complaint.
  5. On 19 May 2020, the landlord sent a stage one complaint response. It identified that it could not fully respond on the issues regarding the lack of contact on the arrears and no referral to the Welfare Benefits Advice team as the Income team had now been disbanded and since December 2019 residents had a Housing Officer as a main point of contact. It apologised for the delay and explained that a rent statement should have been sent at least once a year, that service charge information was enclosed, and signposted the resident to the new online services. It apologised that the service had not met the resident’s expectations and for the delay in replying to the complaint. It offered a goodwill payment of £50.  
  6. The resident responded the following day identifying that service charge estimates had been sent whereas she had requested a detailed breakdown of the services received identifying her individual contributions.  
  7. On 26 May 2020, the resident escalated her complaint to stage two of the complaint process. The points made previously in her complaint were reiterated and the impact of these on her depression and anxiety were emphasised, including not being able to return to work in May 2018 and the impact on her well-being and that of her children. She identified that she had still not received the service charge information requested. She rejected the offer of £50 compensation, wanted a thorough investigation of the failings and a serious consideration of compensation. 
  8. On 23 June 2020, the landlord sent a stage two complaint response. The response identified a more detailed analysis of the issues raised and partially upheld the complaint due to the delay in information, advice and support and inconvenience caused. It offered £250 compensation and attached service charge documentation.
  9. On 29 June 2020, the resident rejected the offer of £250 compensation, noting the matter had been ongoing for three years and continued to affect her mental health. She also identified that she had previously requested a meeting at the landlord’s offices to discuss the issues which had not been responded to.
  10. On 1 July 2020, the landlord responded that due to Covid 19 a face–to–face meeting could not be arranged but a telephone or online video meeting would be possible.
  11. On 6 July 2020, the resident responded confirming that she would prefer to wait until a face–to–face meeting was possible. She stated that she was still waiting for the detailed service charge breakdown for 2019 and needed this by the end of July 2020 for a First Tier Tribunal case and requested a subject access request form be sent.  
  12. The landlord sent a response on 14 July 2020. It confirmed that the response on 23 June 2020 included service charge final accounts for 2017/18 and 2018/19 and the rent increase letter for 2020 which provided a breakdown of service charges. It confirmed that this was the full information available. It also confirmed that the notes provided on the rent account were correct and that details of how the arrears accrued had also been provided.  It identified that a subject access request form would be sent by post as requested. It increased the offer of compensation to £300.  
  13. On 2 November 2020, the resident requested that the matter be investigated by the Ombudsman. 
  14. On 26 March 2021, the landlord wrote to resident confirming that senior managers had carried out a further review of the complaint and had increased the offer of compensation to £400. The resident responded on 29 March 2021 rejecting the compensation offer as she did not feel it adequately reflected the impact the issues had on her. She raised concern that she had still not received a detailed breakdown of service charges for 2019/20. In addition, she identified that she had to request a copy of her rent increase letter for 2021 as it had not been received and had also not received a breakdown of service charges relating to the increase.

Assessment and findings

Administration of rent account

  1. The income collection policy makes clear there should be direct contact with a resident at all stages of income collection. It is also accepted good practice that a landlord should be seeking contact from a resident in arrears to arrange recovery and minimise arrears. During the period from May 2017 to March 2018 arrears rose from £262.73 to £4546.95, but the landlord did not contact the resident regarding the rising arrears between 21 June 2017 and 14 March 2019. Therefore, the landlord did not comply with its policy in the administration of the resident’s rent account.
  2. The evidence suggests that this lack of contact was due to performance issues in the Income team which the landlord accepts. While there is a responsibility on residents to ensure that rent is paid, it is reasonable to expect regular contact from the landlord when arrears arise.
  3. The Housing Ombudsman can only make an adjudication on member landlord’s housing responsibilities. The resident stated that she was not informed by the Council that her housing benefit level had been reduced in June 2017. The housing benefit was paid by the Council directly to the landlord.  Informing the resident of any changes to the level of housing benefit was the responsibility of the Council and therefore the Ombudsman has not investigated this issue as it is not attributable to the landlord.
  4. The landlord also did not comply with its income policy in respect of providing support to the resident to maximise income through welfare benefits and grants. Following notification of the arrears in March 2018 the resident contacted the landlord and made clear that she was trying to resolve issues with the Council’s housing benefit department and later mentioned applying for a Discretionary Housing Payment. Further contacts from the resident also identified ongoing efforts by the resident to access benefits to reduce the arrears. However, there is no indication that she was made aware at the earliest possible time that the landlord had Welfare Benefit Advisors who could assist with this. The landlord’s arrears letters did include details of external advice agencies though the in–house Welfare Benefit Advice team, who had access to the case history, would have been best placed to assist the resident.
  5. Following the involvement of the Welfare Benefits Advice team from August 2019, successful attempts to claim further housing benefit and to obtain a Discretionary Housing Payment were made. Together these payments cleared all the resident’s rent arrears in April 2020. This shows that the landlord did eventually provide appropriate support to the resident.
  6. The landlord did apologise for the lack of contact regarding rising arrears and the lack of referral to the inhouse welfare benefit support. In addition, financial compensation was offered for the distress and inconvenience caused. This was an overall offer of £400 which also covered failures in provision of service charge information and complaint handling. The Ombudsman’s view is that £250 would be appropriate financial compensation for the failures in the rent account administration.
  7. The Ombudsman’s view is that landlord did provide reasonable redress in response to failures in administration of the resident’s rent account. The landlord apologised for the significant problems that occurred, later provided welfare benefit advice which helped the resident clear the rent arrears and offered an appropriate level of financial compensation. 

Provision of service charge information

  1. The landlord’s website states it will provide a detailed breakdown of service charges with the yearly rent notice and also provide service charge statements annually, usually six months after the end of the previous financial year. The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 also places responsibilities on the landlord to provide service charge information when requested. The resident states she did not receive the required information for 2017/18, 2018/19 and 2019/20 when due and requested these in January 2020 and continued to chase. It is accepted that the landlord was slow to provide the requested service charge information to the resident.
  2. The landlord responded by sending service charge information with the complaint response on 19 May 2020, though this only provided estimates as opposed to a detailed breakdown of the resident’s individual contributions as requested. These were provided for 2017/18 and 2018/19 along with the February 2020 rent increase letter which included a summary estimate of service charges on 23 June 2020.
  3. The resident continued to request a detailed breakdown of service charges for 2019/20 in July 2020. The landlord would not be expected to supply details of actual service charge expenditure for 2019/20 at that time[1] although this was not explained to the resident. The landlord’s website indicates it should have provided a detailed breakdown of service charges with the rent increase notice. These presumably would relate to estimates for the year ahead. It appears from the documents provided to the Ombudsman that a detailed breakdown of estimates for 2019/20 was sent in response to the resident’s requests for information but was confusingly titled ‘Service Charge Annual Statement 2018/19’.
  4. Similarly, a detailed breakdown of service charge estimates for 2020/21 should have been sent with the February 2020 rent increase letter. This does not appear to have happened as only a summary breakdown of the estimated service charges appear to have been included and this would not therefore have enabled the resident to understand how her contributions related to the specific services provided.
  5. The landlord did however acknowledge that there were delays in providing service charge information and apologised. As noted above, its overall offer of £400 compensation also considered the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in providing this information. The Ombudsman’s view is that £75 would be appropriate financial compensation for the failures in the provision of service charge information. However, while the landlord took some actions to respond to the resident’s requests for information, the response was not complete. It did apologise for delays and offered appropriate financial compensation but did not fully resolve the issues and as such there was a service failure in the provision of service charge information. 
  6. The resident also identified new concerns which took place after the landlord’s complaint process was exhausted. These included further issues on service charges and maintenance. In accordance with paragraph 39a of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman can only investigate complaints that have exhausted a landlord’s complaint procedure. If the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response on further events, then the Ombudsman would advise the resident uses the landlord’s complaint process in the first instance.          

Handling of complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy identifies that a complaint should normally be made within six months of the matter arising. Two of the main issues raised in the complaint (lack of information on rent arrears and welfare advice support) were not raised as a formal complaint within six months. The stage two response does however address these issues and therefore it appears that the landlord has used the discretion available under its policy to consider matters beyond six months. The Housing Ombudsman Scheme also identifies that a complaint may not be considered if it is raised as a formal complaint with a member landlord more than six months after the matter arose. However, as the landlord has given the historic matters full consideration in its stage two review the Ombudsman has been able to adjudicate on these issues.
  2. The stage one complaint was made on 25 February 2020. The response should have been sent in ten working days but was not sent until 19 May 2020. The resident contacted the landlord on a number of occasions requesting that the complaint be responded to. As such there was a service failure in complaint handling.
  3. The stage one response identified that the landlord could not fully respond on the issues raised as the Income team had been disbanded. It did apologise if the service had not met the resident’s expectations, apologised for the delay in replying to the complaint, and offered a goodwill payment of £50.
  4. While some service charge information was provided with the stage two response there was not an adequate explanation of how service charge information was being provided for 2019/20. It should also have addressed the issue of the lack of a detailed service charge breakdown with the February 2020 rent notice letter.  
  5. In March 2021, the resident wrote to the landlord in response to its last compensation offer. She stated that a subject access request form mentioned in the stage two response had not been received. The stage two response on 14 July 2020 does confirm that arrangements would be made to send the form by post. It is not clear if this was sent and not received or if this was not sent, therefore the Ombudsman is unable to comment on this further. 
  6. The response at stage two did investigate the older issues raised in the complaint and although noted as ‘partially upheld’ the landlord did acknowledge the main failures that occurred. It apologised for the failures and also recognised that compensation was appropriate ‘in recognition of the upset, stress and inconvenience caused’.
  7. At stage two the landlord initially offered £250 compensation although this was later raised to £300 and then to £400. The changes in the offers made do demonstrate the landlord was seeking to agree appropriate redress for the problems that occurred. As mentioned previously the landlord’s compensation offer was not specifically broken down, but the Ombudsman’s view is that £75 financial compensation for the complaint handling failures is in line with its guidance. Taking into account the Ombudsman’s view on financial compensation for the service failures in rent account administration, the £400 overall compensation offer does provide appropriate financial redress for the complaint handling failures also.  
  8. The resident rejected the compensation offer, in particular pointing out the impact the issues had on her anxiety and depression. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to assess payment of compensation relating to the impact on health conditions. If the resident wishes to pursue this aspect of her complaint, she should seek independent legal advice, as such claims amount to personal injury which is outside of the Ombudsman’s remit to consider.
  9. The Ombudsman’s view is that reasonable redress was provided in relation to failures in complaint handling. The landlord apologised for problems that occurred and used its the discretion to consider older issues raised as part of the complaint. It also offered appropriate financial compensation for distress and inconvenience caused. 

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress for failures in the landlord’s administration of the resident’s rent account.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was a service failure in the landlord’s provision of service charge information.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress by the landlord in respect of the complaint handling failure.

Reasons

  1. The landlord apologised for problems with the administration of the resident’s rent account and subsequently supported the resident to obtain welfare benefits and a Discretionary Housing Payment to clear rent arrears. The financial compensation offered for distress and inconvenience was in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance.
  2. While the landlord offered appropriate financial redress, it did not fully resolve all issues relating to the provision of service charge information. There remained a need for further information and appropriate explanation.
  3. The landlord apologised for failings in its complaint handling and used its discretion to consider issues which were not raised within the normal expected timescales for complaints. It recognised that distress and inconvenience had been caused and offered compensation in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance.

Orders

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should send the resident a detailed breakdown of services charges for 2019/20 and detailed estimates for 2020/21, with appropriate explanation, including identification of the resident’s individual contributions to the services provided.

The landlord should confirm compliance with this order within six weeks. 

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should re-offer the £400 compensation to the resident.
  2. The landlord should take steps to ensure that all future service charge information is provided at the appropriate time.    
  3. The landlord should take steps to ensure that further complaints are responded to in accordance with its complaints policy.

[1] The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 identifies that a landlord does not have to provide a summary of service charges until a least six months after the end of the financial year.