One Vision Housing Limited (201817317)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201817317

One Vision Housing Limited

21 May 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 level of redress offered by the landlord in respect of its acknowledged failings in carrying out works in the garden at the property.

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, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary of events

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the housing association landlord. The tenancy commended on 13 November 2017 and the property is a three bedroom house.
  2. Sometime after moving to the property the resident raised concerns with the landlord about the condition of the garden at the property and on 2 July 2018 made a formal complaint.
  3. On 18 October 2018 the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint. In its letter the landlord:
    1. offered the resident £250 as a goodwill gesture as it had not been able to meet the resident’s expectations concerning when the works would be carried out in the garden,
    2. said that its contractors would visit the property on 23 October 2018 to inspect the work required in the garden and work would start within 10 days,
    3. said that if, following a discussion, the resident was still dissatisfied with the complaint response, it would advise her on the process for escalating the complaint to Stage 2.
  4. The resident sent an email to the landlord on 6 November 2018, expressing concern about the completion of the works and asking the landlord to reconsider the amount of the good will gesture.
  5. The resident sent a further email to the landlord on 6 December 2018 asking for a response to her email dated 6 November 2018. On 19 March 2019 the resident sent a further email to the landlord saying that, although she had discussed matters with the landlord, she wanted a written response to her emails dated 6 November 2018 and 6 December 2018 concerning her requests for compensation.
  6. On 21 March 2019 the landlord sent an email to the resident saying that it understood that the complaint had been resolved. The landlord attached a copy of its complaint response dated 18 October saying that it would discuss the letter and anything else the resident wished to resolve the complaint.
  7. On 25 March 2019 the resident wrote to the landlord asking it to clarify where her complaint was in its process and whether it would be dealing with her request for compensation.
  8. The landlord replied to the resident on 3 April 2019 saying that it had tried to speak to her about her letter dated 25 March 2019. The landlord attached a further copy of its letter dated 18 October 2018 and said that its £250 goodwill gesture offer still stood. The landlord also apologised that it had not indicated in its letter dated 18 October 2018 the next steps the resident could have taken if she was unhappy with the outcome of her complaint. The landlord said that the letter should have included the following information: “If you would like to discuss my response in more detail then please contact me on [landlord telephone number]. If you are not satisfied with my response, you have the option to contact our Independent Tenants Panel (‘Tenant Mediation Panel’) who can be contacted on their own e-mail address [email address]. They will review your complaint independently from [the landlord]. Or you could contact your local Councillor or any MP who can also do this for you. If you do not want to approach your MP, local Councillor or our Independent Tenant Panel, you can wait 8 weeks, from the date of this letter, and then contact the Independent Housing Ombudsman Service. The Ombudsman service is independent and will investigate your complaint for you.” The landlord concluded its letter by saying “If you are unhappy with my written response (including my goodwill offer of £250) and [the landlord’s] actual work to rectify your garden, you can take one of the options above. Alternatively if you would like to discuss my response with me please contact me.”
  9. Following contact from the resident this Service sent an email to the landlord on 15 April 2019 saying that it understood that the landlord had responded to the complaint in October 2018 and asking whether the landlord would consider reviewing the resident’s request for additional goodwill/ compensation.
    If the landlord confirmed that it would not review the compensation, then this Service would put the case forward for the Ombudsman’s consideration. The email asked the landlord to respond to this Service within 10 working days.
  10. On 25 April 2019 the landlord wrote to the resident saying, “We have today reviewed your case with the investigative officers and believe that we’ve dealt with your issues and complaint appropriately. We would not be able to offer you compensation in resolution of your complaint as your garden isn’t covered in Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant act 1985. If you believe that you’re entitled to compensation, please specify exactly why and provide any evidence that you have to support your claim. We have liaised with the Housing Ombudsman and requested that they extend the due date they have given to resolve this early.”
  11. On 20 May 2019 the landlord informed this Service that it had not been able to engage with the resident concerning reaching a resolution to the complaint. On 10 June 2019 this Service sent an email to the resident saying that if she did not want to meet with the landlord to discuss the complaint further, to let this Service know so the case could be prepared for consideration by the Ombudsman.
  12. The landlord visited the property on 4 July 2019 and on 18 July 2019 the resident spoke with this Service and said that she had been in contact with the landlord who had asked her to quantify what compensation she was seeking. The note of this telephone conversation says “Noted if she goes back and states the level of goodwill being sought, and the [ landlord] is not willing to award this, she can approach the Service. Asked [the resident] to keep me updated.”
  13. The landlord sent an email to the resident on 12 August 2019 asking her to quantify what she was seeking by way of compensation. Following contact from the resident on 11 November 2019 asking for an update, the landlord wrote to her on 18 November 2019 again asking her to quantify what she was seeking by way of compensation.
  14. The resident sent an email to the landlord on 2 December 2019 asking if the landlord had received a letter she had sent on or around 10 October 2019. The landlord replied on the same day saying that it had not received the letter and asked if the resident could send it a figure for the compensation she was seeking.
  15. The resident wrote to the landlord on 22 June 2020 with a document setting out details of the circumstances of the complaint and photographs of the garden at the property. The landlord replied to the resident on 26 June 2020 and said that it had been over seven months since its email dated 2 December 2019 asking her to quantify the compensation she was looking for. The landlord also said “In now sending your correspondence this week, is there a specific value you are seeking from [the landlord] as an acceptable resolution to your complaint? If there is, could you please specify what this is via email? Otherwise the original offer of £250 still stands and we would be happy to arrange this if it would resolve the complaint for you.”
  16. The resident contacted this Service on 30 June 2020 saying that she had provided the landlord with more details about her request for compensation.
  17. The resident sent the landlord details of the compensation she was seeking amounting to £23,822. On 10 July 2019 the landlord sent a letter to the resident headed “Correspondence after completed Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaint investigation”. In the letter the landlord said “As you are aware, your complaint was upheld because we recognised that there was work required to bring your garden up to a decent standard. We subsequently completed this work to your rear garden, and also offered you a £250 gesture of goodwill due to this delay and inconvenience. You propose a figure of a quantifiable sum of £23,822 as a resolution to your complaint. After further reviewing the complaint record we do not agree with this figure but our previous offer still stands. We believe this is a fair amount as a gesture of goodwill, as your garden that is now of a standard that allows you and your family to use it.”
  18. On 21 July 2020 the landlord sent the resident a letter saying that as the complaint had exhausted its internal complaints process, she had the option to contact its tenants panel or this Service about her complaint.
  19. The landlord has confirmed to this Service that it considers its letter dated 18 October 2018 to be the final response to the complaint and that it had “agreed to potentially relook at the amount offered if [the resident] provided evidence for us to review as she didn’t agree with the amount offered at the closure of the complaint. Once [the resident] did provide what she was looking for and we reviewed it we still stood by the final response and amount offered. We included [the resident’s] next steps for complete transparency and to reiterate what she had already been told at the closure of the complaint.”
  20. Whilst the wording of the landlord’s letter dated 18 October 2018 was unclear as to whether it was the landlord’s final response to the resident’s complaint (see paragraph 6 above) the landlord had confirmed to the resident by 3 April 2019 that the complaint had exhausted its complaints process (see paragraph 11).
  21. Following the resident’s contact with this Service the landlord agreed to explore the possibility of reaching a resolution to the complaint with the resident (see paragraph 13 above). On 10 June 2019 this Service wrote to the resident asking her to let us know if she didn’t want to engage with the landlord about resolving the complaint in order that the case could be considered by the Ombudsman (see paragraph 14). However, the resident did not actively pursue resolution of the complaint with the landlord (e.g., taking almost 7 months to respond to the landlord’s request in December 2019 to provide details of the compensation she was seeking: see paragraph 18). Following her telephone call on 18 July 2019 the resident did not contact the Ombudsman again for 11 and half months, by which time it was 20 months since the landlord’s final response to the complaint, and 14 months since it confirmed to the resident that the 18 October 2018 letter was its final response (see paragraph 23 above).
  22. This Service would expect a resident to actively pursue formal complaints within a reasonable time as it is problematic and impractical to investigate historic issues due to the passage of time.

 

Reasons

  1. Following contact with this Service in July 2019, confirming that she was engaging with the landlord about the level of compensation, the resident did not revert to this Service until June 2020, 20 months after the landlord’s final response to the complaint. The complaint is therefore outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph 39 (d) of the Scheme which states that: “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were brought to the Ombudsman’s attention normally more than 12 months after they exhausted the member’s complaints procedure.”