Places for People Group Limited (202215767)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202215767

Places for People Homes Limited

11 May 2023

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 information provided by the landlord at the start of the tenancy with respect to the service charges.
2. The landlord’s complaints handling has also been investigated.

Background

3. The resident is an assured periodic tenant of the property, a one bedroom flat, owned by the landlord.
4. The resident’s tenancy began on the 7 February 2020. He contacted the landlord regarding a notification that there were arrears on his account due to an overpayment of Housing Benefits which were paid directly from his benefit authority and had subsequently been claimed back from the landlord by the benefit authority. The resident made a formal complaint on 11 February 2022 stating that he was not given the opportunity to read through the tenancy agreement before signing and was not advised of ineligible housing benefit service charges which he was responsible for paying directly.
5. The landlord’s stage one response was issued on 28 February 2022, in which it stated that the tenancy agreement clearly shows details of eligible and ineligible service charges for Housing Benefits and that a copy of the tenancy agreement was issued prior to the date it was signed to allow for any questions to be raised or legal advice to be sought prior to signing. The resident remained dissatisfied with this response and requested escalation of the complaint.
6. The landlord’s final response was issued on 17 May 2022, in which it again stated that it had provided the information prior to the signing of the agreement with sufficient time for the resident to ask questions or seek legal advice.
7. The resident referred the matter to this Service as he disputed the landlord’s response to his concerns about the rent arrears that had accrued. He also questioned whether the landlord had followed its complaints process.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

8. This investigation will consider the information that the landlord provided to the resident during the sign up process to enable the resident to in turn to pay the rent and service charges correctly.
9. This investigation cannot consider the level of the rent or service charge that has been found to be ineligible for housing benefit. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(e) of the Scheme which provides that “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern the level of rent or services charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase”.
10. This investigation cannot consider the actions and decisions of the benefit authority as a Local Authority’s actions in relation to the assessment of welfare benefits sit outside the remit of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

The landlord provision of information

11. The resident was made an offer of accommodation via email on 29 January 2020 and within that offer was provided a copy of the tenancy agreement.
12. The tenancy agreement shows a summary of rent and service charges separated with a total weekly charge. Within the tenancy agreement there is a schedule of service charges broken down showing each service charge element with HBI or HBE showing in brackets at the end of each element. There is no definition of HBI or HBE contained within the tenancy agreement. Providing this definition at this stage would have added a layer of clarity and transparency.
13. The tenancy agreement states “This Agreement is a legally binding contract between you and the landlord. If there is anything in this Agreement you do not understand you should discuss it with the landlord. You can also get advice from a Citizens Advice Bureau, Housing Advice Centre, Law Centre of Solicitor.” This goes on to state on the signature page, “I hereby confirm that the terms of this Agreement have been explained to me and that I understand and accept these terms.”
14. The tenancy agreement was signed on the 07 February 2020 by the resident.
15. During the sign up process a supplementary letter was produced by the landlord that stated that the net weekly rent and service charges were increasing on 6 April 2020. This supplementary letter included the service charge breakdown as per the tenancy agreement with the HBI and HBE on each service charge element listed. Before the total payable there were two amounts showing, one being HBE and one being HBI, both of which include a definition. The HBI being defined as “HBI – Amount of charges NOT eligible for Housing Benefit & Universal Credit.”
16. The resident has signed the supplementary letter on the 07 February 2020 with a Tenant Declaration stating “I confirm my agreement to the increase in rent and service charge that I will pay for the property as set out in this letter”. Though it would have provided extra clarity had the definition of the terms ‘HBI’ and ‘HBE’ been provided within the tenancy agreement, it is nonetheless clear that this information had been provided to the resident at the point that he signed his tenancy agreement.
17. In addition, on the day of sign up, being 7 February 2020, a Customer Sign Up Checklist was completed by the resident and landlord combined. Contained within this checklist was a series of statements that the customer initialled to show their agreement. Two of these agreements state “My Tenancy Agreement has been explained to me and I have signed to accept the conditions” and “The Rent Arrears Policy has been explained and I understand that rent should be paid in advance”.
18. There is also an income and payment details section within this checklist, within which it has been noted next to the heading ‘Agreed Payment Method’ – “will set up direct debit once spoken with housing benefit”. Also within this section it states “NB Customers claiming HB or UC should make arrangement to continue rent payments until their claim is in place. The customer is aware that in spite of their claim they are solely responsible for the rent due.” The resident has initialled this document at the end of this section.
19. Also on 7 February 2020, the resident signed and dated a Direct Debit mandate in favour of the landlord.
20. In all the circumstances of the case it is found that the landlord provided adequate information during the sign up process about rent and service charges. The resident was also provided with sufficient information in relation to the service charge elements which would not be covered by Housing Benefit. The landlord’s complaint responses reflected the actions it took at the sign up process and were therefore appropriate. The landlord’s records of the sign up process demonstrate that information relating to the service charges was provided at that time, including confirmation that a specific discussion was held confirming the resident’s responsibility for making payments as required under the tenancy agreement.

Landlord’s Complaint Handling

21. The resident submitted a formal complaint to the landlord on 11 February 2022. This was following phone calls on the 19 January 2022, 2 February 2022 and 7 February 2022 looking for a written response to his enquiries which he understood the landlord to have not provided.
22. On 21 February 2022 the landlord emailed a stage one acknowledgment and informed the resident that his complaint had been assigned and that it may take up to 10 working days to provide a response. The landlord mentioned the date of response as being before 4 March 2022. The landlord then issued a stage one response on 28 February 2022. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint and did not offer any apology or compensation.
23. The resident requested escalation of the complaint on 14 March 2022, stating that he did not believe that his complaint had been handled correctly.
24. An internal landlord email dated 25 April 2022, stated that it had received the resident’s request for stage 2 investigation on 14 March 2022 but that no acknowledgement had been issued to the resident and the complaint had not been assigned internally.
25. The landlord provided its stage Two (final) response to the resident on 17 May 2022. The landlord stated “I am writing in response to your request for a Stage Two investigation received on 25 April 2022”. The letter went on to say that the complaint was not upheld. The letter also confirmed that this represented the final stage of its complaints procedure and that “if you are not satisfied with our decision or the way I have dealt with your complaint, you can contact a Designated Person. This can be an MP or your local councillor. Alternatively, we have registered our Independent Complaints Panel as a Designated Person”.
26. The landlord failed to deal with the resident’s Stage 2 complaint in line with its complaints procedure insofar as it did not send an acknowledgment within 3 days and did not respond within 20 working days from it.  The Stage 2 response also contained an error insofar as it stated that it received the resident’s complaint on 25 April 2022 whilst its internal correspondence confirms it received the complaint on 14 March 2022, at the time it was sent.
27. The resident contacted the landlord by email on 29 June 2022 and again on 15 August 2022 for the case to be referred to its independent complaints panel. No acknowledgment or response was sent to the resident to confirm such referral or assignment of case.  The landlord’s independent complaints panel was a Designated Person under the Localism Act 2011 and therefore sat outside the landlord’s internal complaints procedure.  Under the Localism Act 2011, the panel could seek to resolve the resident’s complaint with the landlord; however, if it was not able to do so, it could refer the complaint directly to this Service. If this Service did not receive a referral from a Designated Person, a complainant would need to wait eight weeks after the end of the complaints procedure to refer the complaint to this Service.
28. The landlord’s complaints procedure notes that complainants should make a “self-referral” to the independent complaints panel. Nonetheless, having received the resident’s emails of 29 June 2022 and 15 August 2022, the landlord was aware that the resident remained dissatisfied. Therefore, it was unreasonable that it did not proactively refer the resident to the panel.
29. The landlord’s new complaints procedure dated July 2022 has removed the option for complainants to refer complaints to the independent complaints panel.  This reflects the removal of the Designated Person process from the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution process, meaning that from October 2022, complainants could refer their complaints directly to this Service after completing the member landlord’s complaints procedure. However, if it was the case that the landlord had disbanded the independent complaints panel at the time the resident requested it consider his complaint, it should have advised him of this so as to manage his expectations.  By not responding at all the landlord caused uncertainty and inconvenience to the resident and prolonged his complaint.

Determination

30. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the information provided by the landlord at the start of the tenancy with respect to the service charges.
31. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, there was service failure in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Order

32. The landlord to pay the resident compensation of £100 for any inconvenience and distress caused by the service failures identified with its complaint handling.
33. The landlord to evidence compliance with the above order to this Service within 28 calendar days of this report.

Recommendations

34. It is recommended that the landlord provide in writing the resident with a full breakdown of the arrears including a total balance due within 28 calendar days of this report.
35. It is recommended the landlord includes within its tenancy agreements a breakdown of service charges with a clear definition of what ‘HBI’ and ‘HBE’ mean.
36. It is recommended that the landlord carries out a review of its complaint handling process including how level one and level two complaints are logged and assigned for action.