Settle Group (202440375)

Background

1. The resident pays a variable service charge. She asked the landlord to install a handrail at the front steps of her block and it did so. The resident’s representative complained the landlord had charged the resident £250 for the work through her service charge. He explained the resident remained dissatisfied at the end of the landlord’s complaint process because it did not agree to remove the charge.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request to install a handrail at the front steps of her block.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request to install a handrail at the front steps of her block.

Reasons

4. The resident’s representative complained about the £250 charge the landlord added to the resident’s service charge for installing the handrail. He said it had told the resident it would not charge her for the handrail and should have consulted with her it intended to charge.
5. The resident asked the landlord to install a handrail on 24 October 2022. She explained she had a “bad hip” and sometimes the steps were slippery. The landlord visited her on 14 November 2022 to discuss her request and inspect the steps. This was appropriate because the landlord has a duty to consider adjustments for people who may be considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010.
6. The landlord told us it had considered referring the resident’s request to the local Council which administers Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) for adaptations work. It had decided not to refer because DFGs are means tested and it felt the resident would not meet the Council’s criteria for the adaptation. It decided to get a quote for the work instead. This suggests the landlord was considering if installing the handrail was a reasonable adjustment it should agree to.
7. After receiving the quote, the landlord took legal advice. Its Solicitor advised it was not obliged to install a handrail under the terms of the lease and may not be able to recover its full costs through the service charges. It was reasonable the landlord decided to go ahead with the work anyway and shows it was considering the resident’s request responsibly.
8. It decided not to seek to recover its full costs and to charge residents £250 each in their service charge. The landlord was not required to consult with residents because section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 only requires landlords to consult if they plan to do work which would cost more than £250 to each resident paying the charge.
9. The lease explains the service charge includes all costs and expenses incurred by the landlord in managing and maintaining the estate and carrying out its obligations including improvement works.
10. The handrail was installed in August 2023 and the landlord added the £250 charge to the resident’s service charge for 2023-24.
11. Part of the representative’s complaint was that the landlord had told the resident it would not charge her for installing the handrail. We have been unable to find evidence of this in the information seen which included the landlord’s contact notes of discussions it had with the resident and its complaint investigation records.
12. The investigation records showed the landlord had asked the relevant staff members to detail their discussions with the resident. We are satisfied the landlord investigated the complaint appropriately.
13. Through its complaint responses, the landlord explained the legal advice it had received and why it had capped the charge. It confirmed it had no record of telling the resident it would not charge her and had not been required to consult further before doing the work. The landlord’s responses were reasonable and addressed the matters complained about.