Stonewater Limited (202233380)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202233380

Stonewater Limited

7 November 2024

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Communal cleaning and grounds maintenance at the resident’s housing scheme.
2. The resident’s request for information about his service charge.

Background

The resident is a shared-ownership leaseholder with the landlord. His property is a flat within a housing scheme that comprises of a couple of blocks of flats.
The resident complained about the lack of cleaning of the communal areas and the grounds maintenance at his housing scheme on 29 September 2020. He said he understood that government restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic would have affected these services, however restrictions had been lifted and the services were still not taking place. The landlord responded on 26 October 2020. It apologised and said:
1. It had recently appointed a cleaning contractor. It apologised for the delays in doing so. The cleaning contractor would be carrying out cleaning of the communal areas weekly and would clean the windows monthly.
2. There had been some waterlogging of the grounds and additional delays due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It had been waiting for the building developer to complete landscaping and planting. It was in the process of appointing a contractor to carry out regular grounds maintenance. It said this would take up to 2 months and visits would be infrequent as it was coming up to winter.
3. It would refund any charges the resident had paid for cleaning and grounds maintenance for the period these services had not been in place, once it sent out its final service charge statement.
4. The service charge statement the resident had received was an estimate and he would receive a reconciliated service charge statement between April 2021 and September 2021.
The resident continued to report issues with the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance throughout 2021. The issues he raised included: no cleaning taking place for weeks at a time, cleaners not vacuuming due to a problem with the communal electricity supply, the windows and external doors not being cleaned, the communal garden area being covered in stones making it difficult to mow or strim, grass clippings not being taken away, and the benches in the communal garden not being bolted down. He also queried the amount he had paid in service charge several times.
The resident submitted a further complaint about the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance on 28 February 2022. The landlord contacted the resident on 8 March 2022 to say it would respond to his complaint by 22 March 2022.
On 14 March 2022, the resident asked the landlord to explain why the service charge for grounds maintenance had gone up. He said no grounds maintenance had taken place since October/November 2021. He said the communal cleaning charge had almost doubled but the cleaning contractors did not come every week. He asked why the fire equipment charge had gone up by £900. He queried why only 5 properties in the housing scheme were contributing to the service charge.
On 22 March 2022, the landlord told the resident it needed more time to respond to his complaint and said it would issue a response by 5 April 2022.
On 1 April 2022, the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response, it said it had met with the resident to discuss his concerns. It had scheduled cleaning, general maintenance and grass cutting in the coming month. It offered the resident £100 compensation for poor service and inconvenience.
The resident contacted the landlord on 9 April 2022. He said he had not had a response to his query about his service charge. He said he was entitled to receipts for his service charge for the past 2 years. He had only received the estimated service charge statements.
On 6 June 2022, the landlord apologised for not sending the resident the information he had requested. It said the charges for fire equipment included the maintenance of the fire alarm, emergency lighting, smoke vent, dry riser and lighting protection. The resident replied the same day to ask why the charges had gone up and asked for a breakdown of the whole of the service charge he paid as he wanted to know how these charges were calculated.
The landlord responded on 6 June 2022 to say that the service charges were based on estimates and were calculated using the cost of contracts, previous costs of metered services such as electricity, and took into account price inflation. It said that the overall cost of the service charge was divided by the residents who received the service. It said as the service charge was variable, any difference between the estimated and actual cost would be passed on to the resident’s service charge account. The same day the resident again requested that the landlord provide the actual costs of the service charges for the previous years. He reiterated that he was paying for services he had not received as the landlord’s contractors had not carried out either the cleaning of the communal areas in his block, or the grounds maintenance on a consistent basis.
On 6 June 2022, the resident also requested that all 3 of his complaints be considered by the landlord’s customer complaints panel, as he had been waiting for answers to some of the issues he had raised for almost 2 years.
The landlord contacted the resident on 14 June 2022. It said that the reconciliation of his service charge for 2021/2022 was due at the end of September 2022. He would receive the reconciliation of his service charge for 2022/2023 by the end of September 2023. It said it had not received a response from the team responsible for cleaning and grounds maintenance and asked if this team had contacted the resident directly. If not, it would chase up a response for him. The resident replied to the landlord the same day. He said he was still waiting for the reconciliation of the service charge for the year 2020/2021. The landlord had said it would provide this to him over 9 months ago, but he had not received this. He confirmed he had been contacted by a member of the landlord’s staff the previous week but had heard nothing further.
On 15 June 2022, the landlord told the resident that the member of staff he had spoken to had left the organisation, so it would chase the issues relating to cleaning and grounds maintenance for him. It said that due to staff shortages, it had not yet completed the reconciliation of service charge for 2021/2022. It was not allowed to pass on any variation in the charges it had been invoiced for, more than 18 months ago. It said that this would be taken into account when reconciliations were carried out in September 2022, and it would let the resident know what charges it had applied to his account.
The landlord contacted the resident on 20 June 2022. It said it had logged his emails as a complaint.
On 28 June 2022, the resident said the cleaning rota showed that the cleaners had not had electricity for the past 3 weeks. He said apparently someone had attended to clean the windows, however, this could not have happened as there was still blu-tack stuck to them. He attached photos of this.
In July 2022, the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure. The landlord acknowledged his stage 2 complaint on 5 July 2022 and said it would respond by 19 July 2022.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 2 August 2022. It said:
1. It acknowledged that it had not initially provided cleaning or grounds maintenance services. When it did put these services in place, the resident was unhappy with the standard of the cleaning and grounds maintenance.
2. It would arrange for a refund of £369.03 credit to be applied to all affected residents’ accounts up to March 2022 for the lack of service from its grounds maintenance contractors.
3. It would credit the cost of cleaning for the period February 2021 to October 2021, when the cleaners had not been able to vacuum his block.
4. It had been monitoring the cleaning and grounds maintenance services and its contractors were attending in-line with their contracted schedules. It required its contractors to provide time-stamped before-and-after photographs of the sites they attended. This was to ensure contractors were carrying out work to the required standard and to help it investigate any problems. It said the resident could send it photos of any issues if he wished to do so.
5. It had visited his housing scheme and assessed the grassed area. The grass had dried out due to hot weather. It would monitor the area over the next few months.
6. Sweeping footpaths, grass cutting, hedge maintenance and litter picking occurred on average every 10 working days during the summer months, then once a month during the winter, leaf clearance took place in the autumn and weed control took place every 6 months.
7. Problems with access to the gas meter cupboard were now resolved and all residents should now have keys.
8. It increased its previous offer of compensation from £100 to £300, broken down as follows: £100 for the length of time it had taken to resolve his complaint, £100 for its poor communication, and £100 for failing to respond to all the resident’s concerns.
On 22 March 2023, the resident brought his complaint to the Ombudsman. He said services had not improved since the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response of 2 August 2022. He said he had not received the credit for the services the landlord had overcharged him for.
The landlord contacted all residents at the resident’s scheme on 4 April 2023. It said from 5 April 2023, it would have new contracts in place with contractors for estate services. The contractors would be visiting the scheme and would pick up on any outstanding issues. It said there may be ‘some bumps in the road’ while the new contracts bedded in. It acknowledged that there may have been a slip in service over the past months and apologised for this.
The resident submitted a further complaint on 24 April 2023. He said the cleaning had not been done for a month. He asked the landlord to provide an explanation as to why this had not happened and asked it to start checking that the cleaning had been done each week.
On 9 May 2023, the landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response. It said:
1. It apologised for the delay in informing the resident of an increase in his rent. This had been due to an issue with the post. It said it would credit his rent account with £12.40, the equivalent of one month’s rent increase.
2. It had now credited his service charge account with the £369.03 in relation to the lack of grounds maintenance. It had also credited his account with £28.39 for the problems with cleaning. It said it had written to other residents affected by the issues to offer them a refund. It offered him £200 compensation for the inconvenience, distress and delays.
3. It apologised for the slip in services whilst it had changed contracts for its estate services.
The resident contacted the landlord on 9 May 2023. He said he had not had a response to the complaint he had submitted on 24 April 2023. He said it was now over 7 weeks since the cleaners had attended, and the landlord had still not provided him with the reconciliation of his service charges.
On 10 May 2023, the landlord contacted the resident. It said there had been difficulties in getting cleaners. It would ensure someone attended as soon as possible. It said it would send the reconciliations of his service charges once it had identified the actual costs of the services it had provided.
The resident complained again on 31 May 2023. He said he still had not received a response to the complaint he submitted about the cleaning in April 2023. The grounds maintenance was not happening in accordance with the schedule set out in the landlord’s leaflet and the grass was now 3 feet high. He had not been able to enjoy the outdoor areas during recent good weather due to the lack of grounds maintenance.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 6 June 2023 and said it would respond by 20 June 2023.
On 14 July 2023, the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response. It apologised for the delay in responding to his complaint. It recognised that there had been a slip in service as the new contracts for cleaning and grounds maintenance took effect. It said it had taken the contractors time to visit each scheme. It had asked the contractors to attend the resident’s housing scheme in the next 10 working days to address the issues the resident had raised. It offered him £75 compensation for its delayed complaint response and poor service.
The resident contacted the landlord on 19 July 2023, to request that it escalate his complaint to stage 2 of its complaint procedure. He said he would not accept the compensation offered. He had asked the landlord for the schedule for the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance but had not received this.
The landlord sent the resident the reconciliation of his service charge bills from 2020 to March 2023, on 3 August 2023. It said as it had already credited the resident’s account with £341.91 on 5 May 2023, it had applied a further credit of £127.33 to his service charge account to reflect the variances in the accounts. The difference between the estimated and final service charges are set out below. The balances are in the resident’s favour.
1. In 2020-21 there was a variance of £338.32
2. In 2021-22 there was a variance of £52.10
3. In 2022-23 there was a variance of £78.82
On 8 August 2023, the landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response. It said it carried-out an estate inspection in May 2023 and the communal areas were not presenting well. It had ensured its contractors had the maps, equipment and resources they needed to deliver the cleaning and grounds maintenance. It would inspect the resident’s housing scheme more frequently given the concerns he had raised. It would complete an inspection in the next 10 working days and would conduct inspections once a month going forward. It reiterated the offer of £75 it had made in its stage 1 complaint response.
The resident brought his complaint to the Ombudsman again on 14 November 2023. He said no cleaning of the communal areas had taken place in nearly 8 months. He had cleaned the area near his property, but the other areas were still looking dirty.
On 23 January 2024, the resident raised a further complaint. He said there still had been no cleaning of the communal areas since March 2023. Grounds maintenance had only happened twice since March 2023. He asked that the landlord contact him before sending him further information about increases in rent or service charges.
The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 28 February 2024. It apologised for the inconvenience caused to the resident. It said it was unable to consider the annual rent review as part of its complaints process unless there had been a mistake in the calculation of the increase. It said it met regularly with its contractors to ensure they were meeting the standard it expected of them. It said to reflect the missed appointments since March 2023, it would refund the resident £40.08 for the lack of cleaning to the communal areas and £29.46 for grounds maintenance. It said this equalled 6 months of service charge the resident had paid for these services. It offered him further compensation of £225 broken down as £75 for a failure to respond to his complaint within its allocated timescales, £125 for inconvenience, time, and trouble, and £25 for poor communication and delays.
On 30 April 2024, the landlord told the resident it had reviewed his complaint. It said it was clear that the grounds maintenance at the time of his complaint was not being managed effectively. It said it had recently taken steps to ensure it was monitoring grounds maintenance more closely. It made a further offer of compensation of £425, broken down as follows: £350 for the delays in service, distress, inconvenience, time and trouble, and £75 for service failures and incorrect information provided in its complaint responses.
On 24 October 2024, the resident told the Service that the problems with communal cleaning and grounds maintenance continue. He said that after he reports an issue or submits a complaint, the services may improve for a couple of weeks before stopping again.

Assessment

Scope of investigation

The resident has submitted complaints to the landlord about the lack of communal cleaning and grounds maintenance since 2020 and about his service charge since 2021. Paragraph 42.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were brought to the Ombudsman’s attention more than 12 months after they exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. Therefore, this assessment is focused on the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint of 28 February 2022, up to and including the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response on 8 August 2023. However, it is understood that this was a longstanding issue, and the landlord was expected to take this into account in its response to the resident’s complaints. The resident’s complaints prior to 28 February 2022, are noted in the background for context only.
The resident raised a further complaint about the lack of communal cleaning and grounds maintenance on 23 January 2024. This further complaint also falls outside of the scope of this investigation as at the time of the resident’s complaint to the Ombudsman on 14 November 2023, it had not exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure. The landlord should have the opportunity to respond to complaints and resolve issues in-line with its complaint procedure. The resident may be able to refer his further complaint to the Ombudsman if he remains dissatisfied once it has exhausted the landlord’s complaints process. As above, this further complaint is noted in the background for context.
The Ombudsman is not able to consider complaints relating to the level or the liability of residents’ service charges as these are matters for the First Tier Tribunal service which considers disputes around service charges. However, the Service can investigate how the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint about his service charge to assess whether its responses were reasonable and in line with its obligations.

Policies and procedures

Under the terms of the resident’s lease, the landlord is responsible for the cleaning of the common parts of the resident’s block.
The landlord’s service level agreement in relation to cleaning and grounds maintenance is as follows:
1. Cleaning of the communal areas and making sure that they are kept litter free – weekly.
2. Window cleaning – every 3 months.
3. Cutting and maintenance of grassed areas – every 2 weeks.
4. Litter and leaf collection, weed control, shrub, hedge and rose maintenance, and tree maintenance – seasonal, as and when required.
The landlord’s service charge policy states it will give all residents a break-down of the costs incurred in the previous accounting period.
Under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, residents are entitled to information about their service charges. The landlord is obliged to provide a summary of the actual costs incurred for services to any resident who makes a written request for this information. It must provide this within 1 month of the resident’s request, or 6 months from the end of the period covered in the summary, whichever is the later date.

The landlord’s handling of the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance

In its stage 2 complaint response of 2 August 2022, the landlord said it had been monitoring the cleaning and grounds maintenance services and its contractors were attending in-line with their contracted schedules. However, it has not provided the Ombudsman with sufficient evidence to show that it thoroughly investigated and monitored the communal cleaning or grounds maintenance at the resident’s housing scheme. The Ombudsman would expect to see contractor sign-in sheets, copies of the date-and-time-stamped before-and-after photographs it referred to in its complaint response, and contractors’ logs. Nor has it shown that it took any meaningful steps to ensure that these services were taking place in accordance with its service level agreement set out above.
The landlord credited the resident’s service charge account with the following amounts: £28.39 for the lack of cleaning between February 2021 and October 2021, and £369.03 for grounds maintenance up until March 2022. This was appropriate and demonstrates that the landlord recognised that the resident should not have to pay for cleaning and grounds maintenance that it had not provided.
The landlord’s records show that it contacted its grounds maintenance contractor on 16 February 2024, to ask what dates it had attended to complete its scheduled duties at the resident’s housing scheme in 2023. The contractor said it had attended only 6 times in 2023. This was short of the fortnightly visits the contractor should have been conducting to cut the grass, along with the other grounds maintenance duties set out in the landlord’s service level agreement. The landlord did not request this information until 2 years after the resident’s complaint of 28 February 2022, further indicating a lack of investigation on its part.
It is clear from both the resident’s reports and the landlord’s internal correspondence that the cleaning and grounds maintenance services were inconsistent and sporadic throughout 2022 and 2023. It was reasonable that the landlord made further refunds of service charges to the resident since its complaint response of 8 August 2023 to reflect this. It is recommended that the landlord credits other affected residents with any further refunds of service charge due to them for the lack of communal cleaning and grounds maintenance, if it has not already done so.
It was appropriate that the landlord has acknowledged and apologised for the lack of cleaning and grounds maintenance for extended periods. It has also accepted that when these services did take place, they were frequently not carried out to a satisfactory standard. It was also appropriate that it has offered the resident compensation for these failings and for its delays in responding to his complaints. At the time of its stage 2 complaint response of 8 August 2023, the landlord had offered the resident a total of £575 compensation. This offer was reasonable and proportionately recognises the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused to the resident. The landlord’s offer is in line with what the Ombudsman would have awarded had the landlord not already made an offer.
The landlord sent the Ombudsman a log showing that it inspected the cleaning and grounds maintenance on the following dates: 24 August 2023, 18 September 2023, 21 October 2023, 11 November 2023 and 20 February 2024. It is appropriate that the landlord carried out these inspections, however there is no evidence that it carried out regular inspections prior to 24 August 2023. This was unreasonable. The landlord should have considered carrying out regular monthly inspections as soon as the resident brought these matters to its attention. The fact that it did not undertake regular inspections until after its stage 2 complaint response of 8 August 2023, nearly 1 and a half years after the resident’s stage 1 complaint of 28 February 2022, was a failing which would have caused the resident frustration as well as considerable time, trouble and inconvenience.
It is accepted that in its stage 2 complaint response of 8 August 2023, the landlord said it had taken steps to ensure its contractors had the right equipment, resources and maps so that they could carry-out the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance. However, in its monthly inspections of the cleaning and grounds maintenance at the resident’s housing scheme after August 2023, the landlord rated the communal cleaning as very poor on 3 out of 5 inspections, poor on 1 occasion and satisfactory on only 1 occasion. It rated the grounds maintenance as very poor on 3 occasions and satisfactory on 2 occasions. Given that these inspections concluded that both the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance overall were very poor, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to take robust steps to ensure that these services took place as scheduled and to a satisfactory standard. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that it did so.
There is a finding of maladministration in relation to the landlord’s failings in this case as although the compensation it has offered was reasonable, it has not shown that it has taken action to ensure that the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance is being delivered as it should be. The landlord is ordered to carry out a review of its handling of the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance. This should consider the internal policies and processes it uses to manage and monitor communal cleaning and grounds maintenance to ensure they are completed according to its service level agreement and to a satisfactory standard.
As noted above, the resident has told the Service that the problems with communal cleaning and grounds maintenance have continued. It is recommended that the landlord investigate the more recent issues and takes any necessary steps to ensure that its contractors are carrying out these services in-line with its service level agreement.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for information about his service charges

The resident requested reconciliated service charge statements on 9 April 2022. It is not unusual for there to be a difference in the cost of estimated and actual service charges. Costs may rise or fall due to a number of factors including inflation. The landlord’s response to the resident of 6 June 2022, was appropriate as it set out how it had estimated the service charges and explained what was included in the cost of fire equipment and that the charges were divided between residents receiving the services.
However, the landlord is expected to finalise its accounts within a reasonable timeframe at the end of each financial year, so that it can pass on or recover the difference in service charges as soon as practicable. Furthermore, as the resident formally requested in writing that the landlord provide him with his reconciliated service charge statements for the previous years, it had a legal requirement to do so within 1 month of receiving the resident’s request for the reconciliated service charge statement for 2020/2021 and within 6 months of his request for the reconciliated service charge statement for 2021/2022. It was unacceptable that it failed to do so. The landlord is ordered to review its processes to ensure it can fulfil its legal obligations to provide information on service charges to leaseholders upon request.
It is accepted that the landlord informed the resident on 15 June 2022, that the delays in it providing him with reconciliated service charges, were due to staff shortages. However, it would have been appropriate for it to address these delays formally in its complaint responses and to set out to the resident what steps it would take to prevent such delays in future. The landlord has not offered the resident any financial redress for its delays in it providing him with his reconciled service charge statements. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, published on our website, states that where maladministration has been identified that adversely affected the resident, compensation of £100-£600 should be considered. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £150 compensation for the time, trouble, and inconvenience these delays will have caused him. It is also ordered to apologise to the resident.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the communal cleaning and the grounds maintenance at the resident’s housing scheme.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for information about his service charge.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord is ordered to do the following within 4 weeks of the date of this report, ensuring that the Ombudsman is provided with evidence of compliance by the same date:
1. Pay the resident the £575 it has offered him through its complaints process, if it has not done so already.
2. Pay the resident £150 compensation for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused by its handling of his request for information about his service charge. It is also ordered to apologise to him for this failing.
In accordance with paragraph 54.g. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord is ordered to do the following within 12 weeks of the date of this report, ensuring that the Ombudsman is provided with evidence of compliance by the same date:
1. Carry out a review of its handling of the communal cleaning and grounds maintenance. This should consider the internal policies and processes it uses to manage and monitor cleaning and grounds maintenance to ensure they are completed according to its service level agreement and to a satisfactory standard. The landlord is ordered to provide a copy of this case review to both the resident and the Ombudsman.
2. Review its processes so it can ensure that it fulfils its legal obligations to provide information about service charges to leaseholders upon request.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord:
1. Investigates the more recent issues the resident has raised in relation to cleaning and grounds maintenance and takes any necessary steps to ensure that its contractors are carrying out these services in-line with its service level agreement. It is recommended that the landlord provide an update to the resident as to what actions it has taken.
2. Credits other affected residents with any further refunds of service charge due to them for the lack of communal cleaning and grounds maintenance, if it has not already done so.