Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

Southern Housing (202311735)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202311735

Southern Housing

5 August 2025

 

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. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s service charge enquiries.
  2. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared-ownership leaseholder of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 3-bedroom flat.
  2. In May 2021, March 2022, March 2023 and April 2023, the resident submitted enquiries about his service charge.
  3. On 3 October 2023, the resident made a complaint to the landlord, via us, about its response to his service charge enquiries. He said he wanted a breakdown of the charges and supporting evidence to justify them.
  4. Three days later, the landlord responded to the resident’s most recent service charge enquiry. This included information about the charges for communal electricity, gas contract and repairs, bulk waste, salary costs, powered gates and fire safety.
  5. In the landlord’s stage 1 response of 9 October 2023, it upheld the complaint and said there had been significant delays in its response times. It apologised and offered £130 compensation.
  6. Four days later the resident asked to escalate his complaint to stage 2. He said he was dissatisfied with the response, felt it was too general and did not address his specific enquiries.
  7. On 1 December 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 response. This included responses to enquiries about the charges for communal electricity, gas contract and repairs, bulk waste, salary costs, powered gates and fire services. It acknowledged it had not been able to fully respond to the resident’s queries; and said this was because the service charge statements for years 2021/22 and 2022/23 had not been finalised. It upheld the complaint due to delays in its complaint handling, apologised and offered £100 compensation.
  8. The resident asked us to investigate his complaint in May 2024. He said the landlord had failed to provide information to justify the charges. He was concerned because it had not provided actual figures, only estimates.

Assessment and findings

Response to the resident’s service charge enquiries

  1. The resident’s lease agreement confirms the landlord can charge him for expenses reasonably incurred in connection with the repair, management, improvement, renewal, redecoration, maintenance and provision of service for the building.
  2. When the resident submitted his enquiries on 5 May 2021 and 6 March 2022, the landlord acknowledged these within 5 days. However, there is no evidence it ever fully responded to either. This amounts to maladministration and means the resident was left with unanswered queries, which was frustrating for him.
  3. Following the resident’s enquiry of 15 March 2023, the landlord sent letters to all residents of the scheme on 21 March and 11 April 2023. It said these were in response to enquiries from multiple residents raising concerns about the recent service charge budget.
  4. While positive that the landlord sent these, the resident replied on 16 April 2023, saying that the information did not respond to his specific queries, and he asked it to do so. There is no evidence the landlord replied until nearly 6 months later, on 6 October 2023. This was only after the resident expended time and trouble resubmitting his queries on 4 June 2023, and raised his complaint via us on 3 October 2023. This delay amounts to maladministration.
  5. Following receipt of the complaint, the landlord provided responses to the resident’s specific enquiries on 6 October 2023. While positive, it did not go far enough to respond to his concerns about increases in charges for salary costs, powered gates and fire safety. The response did comment on these charges, but did not explain the reasons for the increases. Similarly, the resident asked about a decrease in the charge for bulk waste, but the landlord did not provide an answer to this. Instead, it gave general information about the administration of the service charge for the development and how this had led to some duplication. It was not clear if the landlord was confirming there had been an error in the charge for bulk waste, and this lack of clarity was confusing for the resident. This amounts to maladministration.
  6. The landlord addressed the resident’s specific enquiries further in the stage 2 response. It was only at this point that it explained it was unable to fully respond to his enquiries because service charge actuals for 2 previous years had not been finalised. This was 9 months after the resident had raised his specific enquiries. The landlord had previously told him about delays in it being able to provide the final accounts for these years. However, it had not told him that it could not respond to his enquiries because of this; and it should have done so sooner. This failure meant it was not being transparent with the resident about the service charge. This amounts to maladministration.
  7. The resident has raised concerns about the reasonableness of the charges because the landlord is setting them using estimates rather than actuals. This is not something we can investigate as this is a matter for the First Tier Tribunal. Similarly, we cannot determine whether the landlord has correctly finalised the accounts in line with the terms of the lease and whether this makes any of the charges not payable. The resident would need to raise these concerns with the First Tier Tribunal if he wants them considered further. What we have considered is the landlord’s communication with the resident about this.
  8. Despite the landlord acknowledging in the stage 2 response that it could not fully respond to the resident’s queries because of the 2 years missing actuals, it did not give any indication of when it would be able to do so. This left him feeling further dissatisfied and let down by the landlord. It was only in response to a follow up enquiry on 3 December 2023, that the landlord confirmed it would update him in January 2024 on the expected release of the actuals for 2021/22.
  9. When the resident chased the landlord on 22 January 2024, the landlord replied that it expected to be able to send the actuals out in 3 to 4 weeks. The resident chased in March, April and May 2024, but we have seen no evidence that the landlord responded to any of these. In addition, we have seen no evidence that the landlord has responded to the resident’s concern about how it is continuing to set estimates, without having the actuals available. The lack of responses and poor communication mean the resident has lost faith in the landlord and its service charge process. This amounts to maladministration.
  10. The landlord has confirmed that the service charge actuals for 2021/22 were sent in November 2024. The resident has confirmed receipt of these but said more detail is needed. He has also said the actuals for 2022/23 and 2023/24 remain outstanding. We have made an order for the landlord to send a written update to the resident confirming when it expects to be able to send the actuals for these years. We have made a further order for the landlord to contact the resident to find out what additional details he would like regarding the 2021/22 actuals and respond to this.
  11. From at least June 2023 the resident told the landlord he was withholding payment of his service charge until it provided answers to his queries. He has told us he is unhappy that the landlord has chased him for payment of the outstanding charges and feels this is unfair. The landlord is entitled to charge service charge under the terms of the lease and the resident is required to pay this.
  12. We acknowledge the resident’s concerns about the reasonableness of the charges but, for reasons already set out, we cannot comment on this. Ultimately, if the resident’s account is in arrears, the landlord may follow its income recovery process to collect this money. As this matter did not form part of the resident’s formal complaint, we cannot comment on whether the landlord’s actions were reasonable in the circumstances.
  13. However, we would encourage the landlord to discuss this with the resident to ensure it fully understands any reasons for non-payment, before progressing formal action. We have made an order for the landlord’s income team to contact the resident to discuss this matter and confirm the outcome of this in writing.
  14. The landlord acknowledged failure in its handling of the resident’s service charge enquiries, apologised and offered £130 compensation. Considering all the circumstances, and in consultation with our remedies guidance, the redress offered is insufficient. Therefore, a finding of maladministration is appropriate. We have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £250 compensation, inclusive of the £130 already offered, if not done so. This is line with our remedies guidance and is reflective of the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble the resident experienced as a result of the landlord’s failures.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy at the time said it would acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 5 working days and respond within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. We have seen no evidence that the landlord sent an acknowledgement. However, it sent the stage 1 response in 4 working days. Therefore, it was reasonable that it did not send an acknowledgement, as it provided the full response within the 5 working day timescale for acknowledgements.
  2. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint on 23 October 2023, 6 working days after the resident asked to escalate the complaint. This was 1 day over the 5 working day committed timescale set out in its complaints policy, and so a minor delay. It sent the stage 2 response 29 working days after the acknowledgement. This was over the 20 working day committed response time set out in its complaints policy.
  3. The landlord acknowledged there were delays in its handling of the complaint, apologised and offered £100 compensation. In identifying whether there has been maladministration, we consider both the events which initially prompted a complaint and the landlord’s response to those events. The extent to which a landlord has recognised and addressed any shortcomings and the appropriateness of any steps taken to offer redress are therefore as relevant as the original mistake or service failure. We will not make a finding of maladministration where the landlord has fully acknowledged any failings and taken reasonable steps to resolve them.
  4. Considering the full circumstances of the case and in consultation with our remedies guidance; the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the resident for its complaint handling. We have made a recommendation for the landlord to pay the resident the £100 compensation, if not done so already. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this sum being paid, as it recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s service charge enquiries.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the resident for its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks, the landlord is ordered to provide evidence that it has:
    1. Sent a written update to the resident confirming when it expects to be able to send the service charge actuals for 2022/23 and 2023/24.
    2. Contacted the resident to find out what additional details he would like regarding the 2021/22 actuals and respond to this.
    3. Contacted the resident (by a member of its income team) to discuss his non-payment of service charge and confirmed the outcome in writing.
    4. Paid the resident £250 compensation for its response to the resident’s service charge enquiries (inclusive of the £130 already offered, if not done so).

Recommendation

  1. The landlord is recommended to pay the resident the £100 compensation already offered for its complaint handling, if not done so. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this sum being paid, as it recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord.