From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Notting Hill Genesis (202328376)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202328376

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG)

22 August 2025

 

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 the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns regarding parking, and her request to be issued a parking bay.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord at the property, a 2-bedroom flat. The resident is a carer and has 3 children. The resident said 3 members of her household have disabilities which the landlord was aware of.
  2. On 19 December 2022 the landlord told residents its new parking contractor would start enforcing parking around the estate from 16 January 2023. This included utilising CCTV and ANPR technology. The landlord said all residents would need to apply for new parking permits to use the shared bays.
  3. In January 2023 the landlord issued the resident with a parking permit which authorised her to use the yellow shared bays on the estate.
  1. On 21 March 2023 the resident submitted a complaint about the landlord’s handling of parking around the estate, and that she did not have her own parking bay. The resident said the landlord’s parking policy had discriminated against her by not providing equal access to its properties. She also said the landlord had not taken into consideration her family’s medical needs when allocating her with a parking permit. The resident also said when her new neighbour moved in, they were issued the previous resident’s parking bay.
  2. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 4 April 2023. The landlord accepted there was not enough parking bays to accommodate all residents on the estate. The landlord said it had issued the resident with a permit to park her vehicle in one of its shared bays. It recognised how its process had affected the resident and agreed to allocated 1 of these bays specifically for disabled residents.
  3. On 18 May 2023 the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint. The landlord provided its final response to the resident’s complaint on 15 June 2023. The landlord said it had agreed to carry out a further review of its management of the parking around the estate and agreed to cancel all parking tickets prior to the landlord providing its stage 1 written complaint response.
  4. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response to her complaint. She brought her complaint to the Ombudsman stating the parking bays she is permitted to use are shared bays and are always occupied. The resident stated there is no enforcement of the parking which included a number of abandoned vehicles in the shared parking bays, as well as abandoned around the estate. The resident is seeking compensation and to be allocated her own parking bay.

Assessment and findings

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution: Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
  2. The Ombudsman must consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes.

Scope of investigation

  1. Section 42.c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were not brought to the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising.
  2. The resident said she had lived in her property for over 10 years and had been on a waiting list for a parking bay for this amount of time. She said the landlord had not informed her about the issues with parking on the estate prior to her moving into the property.
  3. We acknowledge what the resident has said. However, as events become historic it can become more difficult for the landlord or the Ombudsman to assess what happened. We encourage residents to raise complaints in a timely manner, so the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issue when they occur, or soon after, and the evidence is available to reach an informed decision.
  4. Therefore, in line with the Scheme we have considered the landlord’s handling of this complaint from December 2022. This is because this was the earliest date from when we have seen evidence about the resident’s concerns regarding parking, and her request to be issued a parking bay within 12 months prior to her complaint in March 2023. We have then considered the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about this complaint up to the landlord’s final response provided on 15 June 2023.
  1. We have also taken into consideration the resident has said she has continued to have issues with the landlord’s handling of parking around the estate after its final written response to her complaint. If the resident wishes to raise a complaint about the landlord’s handling of these matters after 15 June 2023, she can contact the landlord, and she may be able to refer the complaint to the Ombudsman if she remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response to her further complaints.
  2. This is in line with section 42.a. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s [landlord’s] complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
  3. As part of her complaint, the resident requested the landlord withdraw the parking fines she received whilst parking on the estate. We are not able to consider complaints concerning parking fines, as this falls outside the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman. The courts can establish if parking fines are reasonable or payable. This is in line with section 42.f. of the Scheme which states that we may not consider matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal, or procedure. We understand the resident has already taken her complaint about the parking fines to the courts and she has said the fines were withdrawn.

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s parking policy states where there is a shortage of parking spaces it will normally issue permits on a first come first served basis, and then via a waiting list. The landlord states the following residents will be given priority for a permit:
    1. Blue badge holders.
    2. Households with registered carers.
    3. Households living in family sized units where 3 or more bedrooms are occupied, with priority given to those with younger children.
  2. In every unallocated parking scheme, the landlord will ensure there is at least 1 disabled bay where only residents with blue badges can park.
  3. Where the landlord is unable to provide a parking space to a resident who may need it, it will signpost the resident to their local authority to request a parking permit.
  4. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. It will provide its written response at stage 1 within 10 working days, and at stage 2 within 20 working days.

The resident’s concerns regarding parking, and her request to be issued a parking bay

  1. In December 2022 the landlord acted reasonably by informing residents in writing about the changes to its management of the parking bays across the estate. The landlord’s explanation was clear as to how residents could apply for their new parking permits. The resident was then issued with her parking permit for the yellow shared parking bays in January 2023. This was appropriate because it was issued in a timely manner andin line with the landlord’s parking policy which stated that priority would be given to disabled residents, and to large families with 3 or more children.
  2. We understand the resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s ‘first come first served’ approach to permit holders being able to park in the available yellow bays. However, where there were more permit holders than available spaces, we consider the landlord’s approach to have been fair and equal to all residents on the estate. It was also positive the landlord introduced a specific shared bay for disabled residents / blue badge holders to increase the opportunity of its disabled resident’s being able to access parking on the estate.
  1. In the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response on 4 April 2023, the landlord sign-posted the resident to the local authority to apply for a blue badge, and a designated bay on the road within the estate. Whilst we would not comment on the outcome of such an application, it was appropriate the landlord informed the resident that she could apply. The landlord’s communication about this was also in line with its parking policy.
  2. The landlord’s explanation about the resident’s neighbour being allocated a permanent space was reasonable. It was right when the landlord explained it could not give details about the neighbour’s specific circumstances. This was because landlords must carry out its functions in line with the Data Protection Act 2018. This would include that it would be unable to provide details relating to an individual neighbour’s circumstances.
  3. The resident told us the landlord told her the neighbour’s bay had been allocated in error. The landlord has not confirmed this to us and there is no evidence to confirm this. If this was the case, we would not order the landlord to revoke the neighbour’s permission to have a bay and give it to the resident as it is outside our remit to make decisions which may adversely affect other residents who have not complained to us.
  4. We acknowledge the resident has told us the landlord’s parking contractor has not enforced its parking policy around the estate. She said this has led to the shared parking bays not being available for permit holders. The resident said the bays are filled with abandoned and non-permit holder’s vehicles. The resident has also shared a recent photograph of a vehicle with a leaflet on the windscreen telling residents to park wisely due to the impact on delaying residents’ access to emergency services.
  5. We have not seen any evidence of these incidents being reported to the landlord prior to the landlord’s final response to the resident’s complaint on 15 June 2023. Therefore, it appears the landlord has not had the opportunity to consider this evidence through its complaints process.
  1. If these parking issues are still continuing, the resident can report them to the landlord, and the landlord should investigate and respond to the resident to confirm what action it will take to resolve this.
  2. In the landlord’s final response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord agreed to carry out a further review of the permits, bays, and the parking management contract in place. We understand this review remains outstanding 2 years later.
  3. We would expect the landlord to have carried out this further review within a reasonable timescale. The delay will have caused some level of inconvenience to the resident as she has been waiting for the outcome of the review for a long time. However, it is not clear whether the review will result in any improvements to her ability to park near her property. We have taken into consideration that this failure has not impacted the resident’s use of their property.
  4. We will recommend that the landlord to carry out a review of its permits, bays, and parking management contract. The landlord should carry out this assessment in line with its estate management and parking policies and procedures. The landlord should consider using TORT notices to assist it in the removal of any abandoned vehicles where appropriate.
  5. The landlord’s overall handling of the resident’s concerns regarding parking was appropriate given regard to all the circumstances. Therefore, the Ombudsman makes a finding of no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns regarding parking, and her request to be issued a parking bay.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s concerns regarding parking, and her request to be issued a parking bay.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should carry out a review of its permits, bays, and parking management contract. The landlord should carry out this assessment in line with its estate management and parking policies and procedures. The landlord should consider using TORT notices to assist it in the removal of any abandoned vehicles where appropriate.