Notting Hill Genesis (202321386)

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

The complaint procedure

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.

6. The resident lived at the block for over a decade. In 2020, scaffolding was erected after problems with its cladding were discovered. Works began to replace cladding in 2021. The works were expected to take about 2 years. The landlord offered some residents the chance to move and the resident took advantage of this offer, moving out in May 2022.
7. The resident says that, while she was living at the property, the landlord had already made it clear that it intended to offer compensation to residents and that the landlord’s staff told her to attend residents’ meetings to ensure that she received it. We have no reason to doubt her word, but, as we have seen no evidence to support this claim, we are unable to make a determination on this point.
8. In 2022, the initial, exploratory phase of works found that the repairs required were more extensive than previously thought. They would take approximately 2 years longer than expected. In February 2023, the landlord’s board decided that it would:
   1. Offer all current residents the chance to move to alternative accommodation, put them in Band A for housing allocations and pay £3,000 towards moving costs.
   2. Pay residents who stayed 20% of their rent for each week that the works went on.
   3. Pay an extra 15% of rent to those whose flats were surrounded by scaffolding for each week that the works went on.
   4. Offer counselling, pay legal fees and offer financial advice to all residents.
   5. Not offer compensation to former residents.
9. When she found out about the compensation offer, the resident asked to be compensated, alongside current residents, for the period when she had lived in the block and had been affected by the works; a period of 25 weeks.
10. In its stage 1 and 2 responses sent in September 2023 and February 2024, the landlord said that she did not qualify for the compensation offered in February 2023 because:
    1. It had only decided to pay compensation after it had discovered that the works would take longer than previously thought.
    2. This decision had been made in February 2023 after she moved out.
    3. She would not be affected in the same way as current residents.
    4. However, it offered her a 10% “goodwill gesture” rent reduction for the period between the date that the scaffolding was erected outside her flat, in November 2023 and the day she left in May 2023, a period of 25 weeks.
11. In our view, the landlord failed to justify its decision to treat the resident differently from other residents. In its complaint response, iIt said that she was not affected “in the same way” as residents who continued to live in the block because she moved out in May 2022. But, clearly, between November 2021 and May 2022, she was impacted in exactly the same way as other residents. The inconvenience they all suffered at that time was unaffected by the subsequent discovery that the works would last for a further 3 years.
12. The landlord says that the decision to offer compensation was made after the resident moved out. Nonetheless, the decision covers a period during which she lived there. The compensation was to be paid from the beginning of the works until the end. The landlord has not explained why she should not benefit for the period when she lived in the block.
13. We would also note that the landlord failed to explain why it offered the resident a “goodwill gesture” of a 10% rent reduction in recognition of the impact of having scaffolding outside her property for 25 weeks rather than the 15% it offered existing residents under its compensation scheme.
14. In our view, therefore, the landlord’s decisionamounted to maladministration because it failed to explain its decision adequately and the explanation it gave did not provide a proper justification for its decision. Thispotentially had a considerable financial impact on the resident. Had it awarded her 35% of her rent, as it did to those who remained, over the 25-week period rather than 10%, it would have offered her £1,211 rather than £345.
15. We have ordered the landlord to reconsider this decision and to write to the resident and to us explaining its reasoning for any decision. We have also ordered it to pay a sum, £200, in recognition of the inconvenience and distress its failure caused in line with our guidance on compensation.

16. The landlord’s published complaints policy complies with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales which says that landlords should provide a complaint response within 10 working days of a complaint. It must provide a stage 2 response within working 20 days of a request for a stage 2 review. It could ask for a maximum of 20 extra working days to deal with complex complaints which require further investigation. It must acknowledge complaints and escalation requests in writing within 5 working days.
17. In this case, we asked the landlord to respond to the resident’s complaint on 20 September 2023. It provided a complaint response on 28 September 2023, well within its policy timeframe. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 8 October 2023. It provided its stage 2 complaint response on 6 February 2024. This was 83 days later and over 60 days outside the required timeframe.
18. The landlord provided no explanation for this delay. Nor did it apologise or pay compensation. For that reason, we have made a finding that there was maladministration. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £150 in compensation and apologise which is in line with our guidance on compensation and remedies.

Learning

19. We encourage landlords to use the learning resources available on our website. The centre for learning has a library of resources on topics such as complaint handling, repairs, knowledge and information management and Awaab’s Law. Please visit https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/centre-for-learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

20. The failure to respond to the resident’s complaint at stage 2 within its required timeframe may be evidence of poor record keeping. The landlord should consider the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management for accurate record keeping.

Communication

21. The landlord maintained regular communications with residents through meetings and emails which was appropriate and good service.