Runnymede Borough Council (202347223)

Background

1. On 12 March 2024, the resident complained to the landlord about the level of his service charges and that they were too high for the services provided. He also raised a number of queries about those charges. Following the landlord’s stage 2 response the resident asked us to investigate his complaint. The resident told us he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response regarding the level of his service charges, his concerns that he was paying more than some of his neighbours and him paying towards the replacement of a neighbour’s front door. The resident is a variable service charge payer.

What the complaint is about

2. This complaint is about:
   1. the level of the resident’s service charges and that they were too high for the services provided.
   2. the landlord’s response to resident’s queries about his charges.
3. We have also considered how the landlord handled the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found:
   1. the level of the resident’s service charges and that they were too high for the service provided is outside of our jurisdiction.
   2. there was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s queries about his charges.
   3. there was maladministration by the landlord in how it handled the complaint

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Reasons

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.

The level of the resident’s service charges and that they were too high for the services provided

5. We do not investigate complaints about the level of service charge or the amount of the service charge increase. We will also not investigate whether the services provide value for money. If the resident wanted to pursue his concerns about these matters, he may wish to challenge the charges by applying to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) or the court.

The landlord’s response to concerns the resident raised about his service charges

6. We expect landlords to respond clearly and reasonably to residents’ queries. Explanations should be transparent and comply with lease terms. In this case, the resident’s queries included:
   1. his neighbours service charges being much lower than his
   2. whether he was charged a share of the costs for a new front door fitted at a neighbour’s property
7. We are satisfied the landlord’s response to these queries was consistent with the expectations set out above.
8. The lease obliges the resident to pay the landlord a service charge in relation to the repair and maintenance of the structure, exterior, and essential installations of the block. It also obliges him to pay for services to the common parts of the building and other common external areas, services the landlord is legally obliged to provide (such as fire checks and electrical testing) and building insurance. The lease states the resident is to pay ‘a reasonable part’ of these costs.
9. In its stage 2 response the landlord explained what services the resident paid for, which was consistent with the lease. These included block repairs, lights, fire alarms, grounds maintenance, caretaking and cleaning,  management costs and ground rent. They also included fire risk assessments and electrical testing. The landlord confirmed the cost for these services was shared between all the flats, with many of the services being included within the rent for tenants.
10. This was a reasonable response. This is because, tenants usually only pay for day‑to‑day services listed in their tenancy agreement, while leaseholders must pay for the full range of building and estate costs set out in their lease. As a result, tenant service charges are usually narrower in scope and lower in cost than leaseholder charges.
11. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns that he was paying towards the costs of replacing his neighbour’s front door was also reasonable. The landlord explained that although leaseholders were able to have new doors fitted by its contractor, and benefited from the rates it achieved on large contracts, the charge for the door was paid in full by his neighbour.

How the landlord handled the complaint

12. The resident complained to the landlord on 12 March 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day. However, it failed to issue its stage 1 response within the timescales set out in its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). Despite repeated reminders from us on 25 June and 19 August 2024, the landlord continued to fail to provide a stage 1 response. It also incorrectly told the resident on 21 August 2024 that we had instructed it to move the complaint to stage 2, which we had not.
13. The resident contacted us again on 18 September 2024, having received no further response. The resident explained the landlord had called him and told him his complaint had been logged at stage 2 and that it would respond within 10 working days, which it had not done. We then contacted the landlord again on 7 October 2024, only at that point did we instruct it to issue a stage 2 response. The landlord finally provided its stage 2 response on 15 October 2024, 7 months after the complaint was first made.
14. In its stage 2 response, the landlord apologised and offered £75 compensation for the delay. However, this amount was not proportionate to the excessive and unreasonable length of time taken to provide any response. Nor did it adequately reflect the inconvenience and frustration experienced by the resident, who had to repeatedly seek our assistance to progress his complaint.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration, or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.