Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (202215329)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202215329

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited

5 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. This complaint is about:

1. The landlord clearing the property before the end of the tenancy.
2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for compensation for personal items removed while clearing the property.

Background

1. The resident and her partner are former assured tenants of the landlord. The property is a flat.
2. The landlord states it received the resident’s written notice of termination of the tenancy on 10 June 2021. A copy of a handwritten note – undated – has been provided by the landlord in evidence to the Ombudsman, which states the resident had previously sent the landlord her notice of termination and that she believed the end date should be 20 June 2021. The resident further said she moved out of the property on 2 June 2021. As the note is undated, it is unclear if this is the notice referred to by the landlord in correspondence with the Ombudsman.
3. On 14 June 2021 the landlord issued a letter confirming the resident’s termination of her tenancy. The letter states the tenancy would end on Monday 18 July 2021 and the date could not be changed. The letter also states if keys were not returned by noon of the 18 June 2021 she would be charged further. The landlord advised the resident to remove all belongings or she could be charged the cost of removal and disposal.
4. On 15 June 2021 the resident called the landlord disputing the tenancy termination date. The landlord explained it had no record of the resident’s previous notices of termination and the termination date would remain unchanged.
5. On 16 June 2021, the landlord sent an email internally requesting the termination date be adjusted from 17 July 2021 to 10 July 2021 as the termination was received on 10 June 2021.
6. On 15 July 2021, the landlord entered the property to assess it. Photos were taken of the property and a Terminated Property Sheet was completed requesting a medium clear out of household items.
7. On 15 July 2021, the landlord issued a £197.40 invoice to the resident for an empty property cleanout. It is unclear from the evidence provided to the Ombudsman if this was sent to or received by the resident.
8. On 16 August 2021, the landlord spoke with the resident’s partner who stated they attended the property on 17 July 2021 to empty it, to find the locks had been changed. Belongings left in the property included child’s toys, a tablet, collectibles, tools, some white goods and the resident’s parents’ ashes. The resident was asked to provide a list of the items left in the property.
9. The landlord issued a stage one response to the complaint on 26 August 2021. The landlord stated it was not liable as none of the items specified were in the property when it was cleared. The landlord further stated it received the resident’s termination notice which advised she had moved out on 2 July 2021 and there was no mention of any remaining items. As a goodwill gesture the landlord would waive the re-charge for the property clear out.
10. On 14 September 2021, the resident advised the landlord she would like to appeal the landlord’s its complaint decision. The resident’s partner requested to be provided with photos taken by the landlord of the property prior to clear out; the landlord to admit listed items were in the property when the landlord took possession, and reasonable compensation to be offered for items removed as well as for emotional distress.
11. The resident said they had rung the landlord on the 18 July 2021 to advise the locks had been changed and her items were still in the property. The resident states she was advised that she would be contacted to be granted access to the property to remove the items, but never heard back.
12. The landlord issued its final response to the complaint on 4 October 2021. Although the landlord admitted its error in providing the wrong tenancy termination date in the letter, it reaffirmed its stage one decision that the resident had already confirmed she had moved out of the property, that no items of value were recovered when the property was cleared on 22 July 2021. As a goodwill gesture the landlord agreed to revisit its termination procedures due to the resident’s complaint.
13. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response as:
14. The landlord refused to provide photos to the resident that it claims show no personal items were in the property when it was cleared.
15. The resident argued that she was under no obligation to inform the landlord of her intent to visit to the property to remove items prior to the end of the tenancy.
16. The resident also queried why the removal charge had been levied initially if there were no items to remove.
17. As a desired outcome the resident requested compensation for the lost goods and emotional distress.

Assessment and findings

Clearance of the property before the tenancy end date

18. According to the tenancy agreement, the resident should inform their housing office in writing at least four weeks before they want to end their tenancy. The notice period must end on a Monday, and the property keys must be returned to the landlord by noon of the tenancy end date. When the tenancy ends the resident must remove all their furniture and personal belongings from the property including from any greenhouse, shed or garage. Any items left behind will be disposed of (after giving the resident notice) and the resident may be charged reasonable costs for this and any related storage costs.
19. The landlord has advised the Ombudsman that it does not currently have any policy covering empty homes or for ending of a tenancy.
20. The Ombudsman notes that although the property was cleared by the landlord on the 22 July 2021, the clearance process began when the landlord accessed the property on 15 July 2021, at which time the locks were changed which prevented the resident from gaining access.
21. The landlord has an obligation to the resident to correctly advise them of the termination date. Although the landlord recognised its error when calculating the termination date of the tenancy, and corrected the error on its systems, it took no steps to inform the resident of the error and provide them with the correct termination date. Regardless of the resident’s notice of termination, in which she states she had moved out of the property on 2 June 2021, the property and its contents remained in the possession of the resident until the termination date.
22. In its letter of 14 June 2021, the landlord provided the resident with an incorrect termination date. The letter further advises the date cannot be changed. It is therefore unreasonable for the landlord to proceed with clearing the property while the resident believed she still had access to the property and her belongings. Although the resident had said she had moved out, she was still entitled to access the property, until the termination date listed in the letter.
23. The landlord has agreed as a gesture of goodwill to waive the re-charge for the removal of items left behind in the property. As the resident was given an incorrect termination date, she was prevented from clearing the property as required prior to the termination date, due to the landlord changing of the locks.
24. As the resident was not afforded the opportunity to remove the belongings before the property was cleared, by the landlord’s actions, the landlord’s waiver of the property clearance charge is reasonable under the circumstances, as it has admitted providing the resident with the incorrect termination date, however, in the Ombudsman’s opinion it should have done more to put things right for the resident.
25. As a result of the landlord’s premature clearance of the property, the resident has suffered inconvenience by her visit to the property on the 17 July 2021. In addition, the resident would have been distressed and confused to arrive at the property only to find out that the locks had been changed and that she was unable to access her personal property, despite the being advised the tenancy would end the following day. In the Ombudsman opinion the landlord’s actions, by clearing the property prior to the termination date provided to the resident, amount to maladministration.
26. According to the landlord’s compensation policy, the failure of the landlord to deliver a service resulting in severe inconvenience to the customer can result in compensation of up to £500, dependant on the impact on the resident.
27. We note the landlord has not acknowledged its failings in clearing the property before the advised termination date. In this respect, the landlord’s actions were not satisfactory and this Service would expect it to attempt to put things right.
28. The Ombudsman’s Remedies guidance suggests awards of between £100-£600 where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident. In this case this service considers the amount of £250 to be a reasonable amount considering the distress and inconvenience, experienced by the resident.

Compensation for Personal Belongings

29. The Ombudsman disagrees with the landlord’s assertion that there is no evidence of the resident’s belongings being left in the property, and that photos were taken of all the remaining items. The ten photographs provided by the landlord as evidence do not encompass the entire property, and in addition the photos themselves show items; including chairs, bookcases, and bedding that may have been of value to the resident. The fact that the landlord initially charged the resident for the removal of items is further evidence that there were some items at the property which were cleared by the landlord. The resident’s visit to the property on 17 July 2021, would also indicate some items of value to the resident remained because it is unlikely the resident would have visited the property if she did not have any items there which she wished to reclaim. It would have been distressing for the resident visit to the property only to find out the locks had been changed and her property had been disposed of without prior notification.
30. The resident has also provided a copy of a video taken while attempting to enter the property on 17 July 2021. The video does not clearly show any of items the resident says were left in the property, at the time, however it does show evidence of some items. Both the photos and video provide limited evidence as photos capture a moment in time and it is not possible to determine what happened before or after the photos/videos were taken. Therefore, the photos and video in themselves do not provide a definitive record of what items were left in the property at the time when the landlord cleared it.
31. The tenancy agreement states that items left behind will be disposed of ‘after giving the resident notice’. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the landlord attempted to provide the resident with said notice prior to its disposal of the items. According to Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977; possessions left behind at the end of a tenancy continue to belong to the tenant. A landlord must give notice to a tenant that it intends to dispose of any goods left behind in a property, even if the tenant has given up possession, the landlord remains liable to take reasonable care of items left behind, as an “involuntary bailee”. This notice should be sent to the tenant’s current address (if known) as well as attached to the property in case the tenant returns to collect their property. The notice must contain the following information:

a. The location of the goods.

b. If the goods are to be sold, the location of the sale.

c. Notification that sale and storage costs will be deducted from the proceeds of any sale, should one take place.

d. A list of items being stored.

32. It is clear then that the landlord has failed to adhere to the above provisions and its actions in disposing of the resident’s property without notification or consent, amounts to maladministration.
33. The Ombudsman cannot award compensation for cost of the resident’s personal belongings, as we are unable to confirm what items were left at the property at the termination date. In addition, the value of the items, specifically the ashes of the resident’s parents, would be difficult for this service to quantify. We therefore consider it appropriate for the landlord to raise a claim for the resident under its liability insurance, to consider the resident’s claim for compensation for the value of the lost items.
34. The landlord’s complaint responses also demonstrate a lack of empathy in failing to acknowledge the impact of its actions on the resident, including the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident by disposing of the items remaining in the property without notifying the resident. We also note the landlord has made no attempt to put things right for the resident.
35. According to the landlord’s compensation policy, the failure of the landlord to deliver a service resulting in severe inconvenience to the customer can be awarded up to £500 dependant on the impact on the resident.
36. The Ombudsman’s Remedies guidance suggests awards of between £100-£600 where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident. In this case this service considers the amount of £250 to be a reasonable amount considering the inconvenience and distress experienced by the resident by the landlord’s refusal to compensate her for personal items disposed of by the landlord.

Determination

37. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its clearance of the property before the tenancy end date.
38. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s request for compensation for personal items removed while clearing the property.

Orders and recommendations

39. We order the landlord to pay the resident the total sum of £500 within four weeks of the date of this report:

a.     £250 for its maladministration in clearing the property prior to the termination date.

b.     £250 for its maladministration in response to the resident’s request for compensation for personal items removed while clearing the property.

40. The Ombudsman also orders the landlord to raise a claim for the resident under its liability insurance. If the landlord does not have liability insurance, we order the landlord to conduct an assessment of the value of the residents resident’s belongings and pay this amount to the resident. The landlord should provide evidence to the Ombudsman within four weeks to confirm it has referred a claim to its liability insurer or it has carried out its own investigation into the resident’s claim.
41. In light of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s belongings and its refusal to offer reimbursement, this Service orders the landlord to issue a formal apology to the resident. The landlord should share this written document with both the resident and this Service and should do so within four weeks of the date of this report. 
42. The landlord has advised the Ombudsman that it does not currently have any policy covering empty homes or for ending of a tenancy. We recommend that the landlord produce written policies covering these matters if it has not already done so.