Platform Housing Group Limited (202410718)

Decision
Case ID	202410718
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Platform Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	28 October 2025

Background

The resident moved into the 1-bedroom flat in December 2021. She told the landlord her flat is too small, she feels claustrophobic, and it is affecting her mental health. She asked for a management move because of this. The resident said the landlord had not supported her with this request and kept asking her to contact the local authority. The resident’s doctor wrote a letter of support for her management move. The landlord wrote back to the resident’s doctor. The resident said the landlord’s letter contained incorrect information. The resident asked us to investigate as she was not satisfied with the landlord’s final response.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about:
1. The letter the landlord wrote to the doctor.
2. The level of support the landlord offered the resident regarding her management move request.
3. How the landlord responded to the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

There was no maladministration with the letter the landlord wrote to the doctor.
There was no maladministration with the level of support the landlord offered the resident regarding her management move request.
There was no maladministration in how the landlord responded to the complaint.

Summary of reasons

The landlord explained there had been a change in the terminology used for moves. It also said it believed it had the right to pass information on to the resident’s doctor. These were reasonable explanations.
Through its complaint responses the landlord evidenced its offer to support the resident with her management move request.
The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint broadly in line with its complaint policy and our Code.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
12 March 2024 (the landlord received on 14 March 2024)	The resident said she would like to make a formal complaint. She complained that the landlord sent incorrect information to her doctor and how it had dealt with her management move request.
20 March 2024 (the landlord received on 21 March 2024)	As the resident had not had a response from the landlord, she wrote again reiterating her complaint.
22 March 2024	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint. It said it would send its stage 1 response by 9 April 2024.
8 April 2024	The landlord sent its stage 1 response. It had not telephoned the resident to discuss the complaint as she asked it not to. The landlord believed it was necessary to inform the doctor of the context of the management move request. It had not disclosed any medical details, and it was responding to the doctor’s letter. Processing and sharing information was in line with the resident’s tenancy agreement. It believed it sent accurate information and asked the resident to detail any inaccuracies. The landlord advised the resident had sought help from a local councillor and solicitors to try to get a management move. The landlord had referred these parties and the resident to join the local authority’s housing register. It advised its policy is for residents to be on the register before it can consider management move requests. The landlord highlighted 2 staff members tried to visit the resident to discuss the management move on 26 March 2024. However, the resident cancelled the appointment. The landlord said this showed its commitment to support the resident.
12 April 2024 (received by the landlord on 15 April 2024)	The resident asked to escalate her complaint. She was not happy with the landlord’s stage 1 response. She said it was unfair she had to keep repeating herself, but no one was listening to her. The landlord’s letter to the doctor was incorrect. It said she had 5 management moves, however the resident said she only had 3, the other 2 were transfers. The resident said she did not have to go on the housing register for the landlord to offer management moves. The local authority does not do the urgent move she was requesting.
22 April 2024	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request. It confirmed it would respond by 21 May 2024.
Throughout May 2024	There were telephone calls between the resident and the landlord discussing the complaint, management move request, and responses to the resident’s solicitor.
21 May 2024	The landlord wrote to the resident to advise it needed longer to complete the investigation. It needed a 20-working day extension.
10 June 2024	The landlord sent its final response letter. It said that the term management move was a recent one. It previously referred to these as transfers. It recognised this may have caused confusion. However, it did not agree it sent the doctor incorrect information. The landlord said it had offered the resident continuous support and assisted her in previous management moves/transfers. It had explained to her and her solicitors she needed to apply to the local authority before it could consider her management move request. The landlord understood that as the local authority refused the resident’s housing application, the resident believed it had a duty to move her. The landlord said this was not the case. She needed to reapply to the local authority. The landlord offered to support the resident to do this, but she refused. The landlord also addressed the fact the resident said she did not feel listened to. It could not find any evidence of the resident’s allegations that staff members had made negative comments about her to other agencies. It found it had clearly explained the criteria for a management move and offered to help her.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident told us she remains feeling claustrophobic in her flat and this makes her depression and mental health worse. She has times when she cannot eat and sleep. Due to this she asked for a management move 3 years ago. She feels deliberately imprisoned in the flat. As a resolution she wants the landlord to move her to a larger 1-bedroom property.

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.

Complaint	About the letter the landlord wrote to the doctor.
Finding	No maladministration

Through the landlord’s complaint process it said it believed it had the right to pass information on to the resident’s doctor. It was appropriate for the landlord to reconsider the decision it took.
It identified its change in terminology, from transfers to management moves had caused the confusion. Identifying this inconsistency was positive complaint handling. We accept this was a reasonable misunderstanding.
We recognise the resident was concerned about this. However, the landlord has provided an explanation for the confusion. The landlord received the doctor’s letter. It felt the need to respond to this, however fundamentally, this did not change any outcome for the resident.
As such we find there was no maladministration with the letter the landlord wrote to the doctor.

Complaint	The level of support the landlord offered the resident regarding her management move request.
Finding	No maladministration

Through the landlord’s complaint process it evidenced it had offered support to the resident in the following ways:
1. It arranged to visit the resident to discuss the management move on 26 March 2024. The resident cancelled the meeting. The landlord, in its final response letter reiterated this offer of help.
2. It communicated in the way the resident wanted it to.
3. It gave advice on how the resident could be considered for a management move.
4. It gave advice about the local authority’s allocation policy and what they need to consider a move on medical grounds.
5. It also set the resident’s expectations by saying it would not consider her for a management move until she had registered with the local authority.
We have also seen in the landlord’s records there were numerous phone calls to the resident to discuss the situation.
The landlord evidenced it responded to contact from the resident. It offered help before and during the complaint. After the final response letter, the landlord identified a local authority employee who is willing to contact the resident to help complete the application. This shows its continuing commitment to supporting the resident in this matter.
The landlord’s policy is for residents to register with the local authority prior to considering them for a management move. We understand the resident did this but could not gain access on to the register. It was appropriate for the landlord to offer the resident advice on the local authority’s allocation policy and what it might need to consider a medical move. It was also appropriate for it to offer the resident support in completing the application.
As such, there was no maladministration in the level of support the landlord offered the resident regarding her management move request.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint.
Finding	No maladministration

The resident sent 2 requests for her complaint to be logged on 12 and 20 March 2024. These were sent through the post. The landlord date stamped them as being received on 14 and 21 March 2024 respectively.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 22 March 2024. This was 1 working day outside its policy of having 5-working day timeframe to acknowledge complaints. We do not believe this posed enough of a detriment to the resident to be a service failure.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response in line with its complaints policy. It also acknowledged the resident’s escalation request, in line with its policy.
The landlord extended the final response letter target date. It has the right to do this in line with its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code.
In the landlord’s extension letter, it did not provide the resident with our details. This is something the Code says it must. We note this new clause was enforceable from 1 April 2024 and the landlord wrote to the resident on 21 May 2024. We are aware the resident was aware of our service at that time. Therefore, in terms of the detriment to the resident, we do not believe she was impacted by this omission.
There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.