Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

Sanctuary Housing Association (202428874)

Back to Top

 

Decision

Case ID

202428874

Decision type

Investigation

Landlord

Sanctuary Housing Association

Landlord type

Housing Association

Occupancy

Assured Tenancy

Date

14 October 2025

Background

  1. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom 3rd floor flat owned by the landlord. He moved to the property in April 2023. A few months into the tenancy, the resident became aware his rent and service charges had been increased. The resident said he had not received any notice of this change before it took effect. The resident asked us to investigate the complaint as he was unhappy with the landlord’s final response.

What the complaint is about

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. the resident’s rent and service charges account.
    2. the associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

  1. There was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s rent and service charges account.
  2. There was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaint.

Summary of reasons

  1. The landlord failed to provide the resident with notice of the upcoming rent and service charge increase. However, it acted fairly by acknowledging those errors and put things right by offering proportionate compensation for the impact its failings caused the resident.
  2. The landlord did not provide an adequate response at stage 1 of its complaints process and caused an avoidable delay in responding to the resident’s concerns about data. However, it acted fairly by acknowledging those errors and put things right by offering proportionate compensation for the impact its failings caused the resident.

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.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations

It is recommended the landlord reoffers the £300 compensation to the resident if this has not already been paid.

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date

What happened

23 June 2024

The resident complained to the landlord about the increase in his rent and service charges 5 months into his tenancy. He was also concerned the landlord shared his details with an energy company without his consent.

9 July 2024

The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It did not uphold the resident’s concerns and said:

  • It increased the rent and service charges on 1 May 2023 which was in line with the tenancy agreement
  • It found no evidence it shared any personal details with the energy company which it was not permitted to share

26 July 2024

The resident asked to escalate his complaint. He was unhappy the landlord had not told him about the increase before it was applied and said he had evidence it shared his date of birth with the energy company.

16 September 2024

The landlord issued its final response to the complaint and said:

  • It should have told the resident there was a pending increase when he signed his tenancy
  • It should have referred the resident’s concerns about the details shared to its data protection team and it arranged to do so
  • Its stage 1 response failed to address the resident’s concerns fully

 

The landlord apologised for its failings and offered the resident £300 compensation broken down as follows:

  • £150 for not advising him of the correct process for data concerns and not notifying him of the rent and service charge increase in 2023
  • £150 for poor quality investigation at stage 1 of its complaints process

Referral to the Ombudsman

The resident said he was unhappy with the amount of compensation offered by the landlord for the failure to provide notice of the rent increase and poor complaint handling.

 

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.

What we did not consider

  1. The resident has mentioned that he raised an issue with the landlord about not wanting to pay rent increases because he was unable to use his balcony. We may not consider complaints that are made prior to the complaint exhausting the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. We have seen no evidence the resident raised the issue of the balcony as a complaint with the landlord. Therefore, we have not considered the issue with the balcony as part of this investigation.

Complaint

The landlord’s handing of the resident’s rent and service charges account

Finding

Reasonable redress
  1. We may not investigate complaints about the level of rent or service charges or level of increase. The tribunal or court are more likely better placed to consider this matter, given their powers and expertise. Our investigation into this complaint focused on whether the landlord acted in line with its legal and policy obligations and whether it acted fairly in the circumstances of the case.
  2. According to the tenancy agreement, the landlord may increase the rent once in any one year and service charges twice a year. The agreement says the landlord has to give the resident notice of any proposed increase 4 weeks before it is due to take effect. This is confirmed in the tenancy handbook which says the landlord will give the resident a minimum of 28 days’ notice in writing about any changes to the rent. There are no clauses within the agreement which prevent the landlord from increasing the rent in the first year of the tenancy.
  3. The resident moved in on 13 April 2023. The rent and service charges were increased from 1 May 2023. This was the only increase that year which was in line with the terms of the tenancy agreement. However, the landlord confirmed it did not provide any notice to the resident. It acknowledged this was a failing, apologised, and offered the resident compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience this caused him.
  4. When there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  5. The landlord acted fairly by apologising to the resident for its failure to provide him with notice of the upcoming rent and service charge increase when he moved in. It explained to the resident it did not take any action for the first 4 months because his account was in credit which covered the shortfall. The direct debit was increased to reflect the new rent and service charges in September 2023. This meant there were no arrears incurred as a result of the unnotified increase.
  6. The landlord offered the resident £150 compensation but this was for 2 failings, therefore we have assumed £75 was for the failure to provide notice. This amount is in line with the landlord’s policy to reflect time, trouble and inconvenience caused as a result of providing insufficient information. It is also in line with our remedies guidance for situations, such as this, where there was a failure which caused some time and trouble or disappointment, but it may not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the resident. This is because the issue was with the landlord’s communication, which did not affect the overall outcome that the rent was increased in line with the tenancy agreement.
  7. In conclusion, the landlord acted fairly by acknowledging and apologising for its failures. It put things right by offering compensation for the impact this caused. Additionally, it said it was reviewing its tenancy sign up checklist to include highlighting to residents that there will be a review undertaken annually to the rent and service charges. This demonstrated it had learnt from the outcomes of the complaint. Therefore, we have found that the landlord has offered reasonable redress for the failings identified in its handling of the resident’s rent and service charges account. This finding is made on the understanding that the £75 compensation is reoffered to the resident if this has not already been paid.

Complaint

The handling of the complaint

Finding

Reasonable redress
  1. The landlord responded to the complaint at stage 1 of its process on time. It extended the timescales at stage 2 in line with its policy and responded within the new agreed timescale.
  2. In its stage 2 response the landlord admitted it failed to provide an adequate response at stage 1 of its process. It also admitted it misdirected the resident’s concerns about data.
  3. The landlord acted fairly by apologising for the errors it identified and it put things right by providing a comprehensive response at stage 2. It also referred the resident’s concerns about data to the correct team to investigate as a potential data breach.
  4. The £150 compensation offered by the landlord for not providing an adequate response at stage 1 of its process was on the higher end of its compensation policy for poor complaint handling. The remaining £75 compensation for time, trouble and inconvenience caused by miscommunication about the data breach process reflects its compensation policy for failures to follow policy or procedure. The compensation for both failings is proportionate to the impact caused to the resident considering it caused a delay in him receiving a full response to the concerns he raised. It is also line with our remedies guidance for situations where there were failures which adversely affected the resident.
  5. The landlord has not demonstrated any specific learning from these outcomes and we have addressed this below. However, it has acted fairly and put things right therefore we found it offered reasonable redress for the failings identified in its complaint handling. This finding is made on the understanding that the £225 compensation is reoffered to the resident if this has not already been paid.

Learning

  1. The landlord should keep in mind provision 6.7 of our Complaint Handling Code which says landlords must address all points raised in the complaint definition and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice when appropriate. The landlord should also ensure it directs concerns to the relevant team at the first opportunity. Had it done so in this case, it could have addressed the resident’s concerns sooner.

Knowledge and information management

  1. The landlord did not keep an appropriate record of the upcoming rent and service charge changes after it shared these with the previous resident. Had it done so, it could have told the resident his rent and service charges were due to increase when he moved in and set up the correct payments at the outset.

Communication

  1. The landlord acknowledged the gaps in its communication with the resident which caused the issues raised.