Thrive Homes Limited (202415991)

Decision
Case ID	202415991
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Thrive Homes Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Leaseholder
Date	10 February 2026

Background

The resident pays a monthly variable service charge to the landlord under the terms of her lease. This includes charges for grounds maintenance services. She raised a formal complaint with the landlord about the general standard of the grounds maintenance service. In particular, she said the bushes outside her home were so high that they blocked the light out from her windows. She said she could not open her windows until the grounds maintenance team cut the bushes back. She said she had contacted the landlord on several occasions but the work was still outstanding. She said she was paying for a service that the landlord was not providing.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the grounds maintenance service.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We found that:
1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the grounds maintenance service.
2. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the grounds maintenance service

Although the landlord appropriately acknowledged its failings and offered compensation, it did not keep the commitments it made in its stage 2 response. This meant the same issues occurred again.

Complaint handling

The landlord responded to the resident at both stages of the complaints process in line with its complaints policy.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 10 March 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident: £200 (the landlord may deduct from this amount the £100 compensation it previously offered if this has already been paid) to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s concerns about the grounds maintenance service This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 10 March 2026
3	Order The landlord must put in place a plan of action detailing how it will ensure that its grounds maintenance contractors keep the bushes outside the resident’s property trimmed to ensure that they do not block the light and that she can open her windows. This should include ensuring that the relevant area of the scheme is part of the contractor’s maintenance schedule. The plan should also confirm the frequency of the routine scheme inspections and appropriate reporting routes to ensure a sufficient response should there be any further issues. The landlord must send the resident and us a copy of the plan.	No later than 10 March 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
22 June 2023	The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord about the grounds maintenance service. She said the landlord was not completing the work to a high standard. She said the bushes outside her home were very high, they blocked the light out from her windows, and she could not open her windows. She said the landlord’s contractors had also left the weeds to grow from the pavements. She said the contractors cut the grass on 1 June 2023 but did not carry out any further work. She said she had contacted the landlord on several occasions but the work was still outstanding. She said she was paying for a service that she had not received.
5 July 2023	The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response. It said it was waiting for a date from its grounds maintenance team to rectify the issues. It apologised and said to resolve the issues it would: complete fortnightly estate inspections act on the outcome of the estate inspections and raise any issues with its contractor keep in contact with its contractors and field officer to ensure it maintained the property update the resident by 21 August 2023
19 August 2023	The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2. She said: she felt the landlord had not handled her complaint properly the grounds maintenance team visited in July 2023 but they only cut the grass. They did not cut back the bushes, which were preventing her from opening her windows it took another 10 days for the contractors to return to cut the bushes back once she had informed the landlord. They did not clear the weeds at either visit it was the second year in a row that she had made a formal complaint about the grounds maintenance service and she felt embarrassed to live in her property
19 September 2023	The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 complaint response. It said it upheld the complaint as it had taken multiple visits and a long time to resolve the grounds maintenance issues. It said: its grounds maintenance contractors carried out the grounds maintenance on 21 August 2023 it made them aware that they had missed some of the bushes and grounds so they returned on 31 August 2023 and completed the work to put things right it had requested more estate inspections and works with the contractor on a monthly basis it offered the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the distress, frustration, and inconvenience caused by not addressing the issues sooner and by not keeping the resident informed
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate as she said she was unhappy with the landlord’s response to her complaint in relation to the grounds maintenance. She said she wanted compensation for the time it had taken her to chase the landlord to resolve the issues. She also said she wanted an agreed plan of action in place to ensure the same issues did not arise again and she wanted the landlord to commit to the plan.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the grounds maintenance service
Finding	Maladministration

What we have not investigated

Part of the complaint is about the reasonableness of the grounds maintenance charges, and the level of the service charges in relation to the services the resident has received. We may not investigate complaints about the level of rent or service charge or their increases, or where it would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective to seek a remedy via another procedure, such as the Tribunal. However, we can assess whether the landlord’s overall communication with the resident was fair and reasonable and whether it responded sufficiently to her queries. If the resident remains unhappy with the level of service charges, she may wish to seek independent advice.

What we have investigated

The resident raised concerns with the landlord about the grounds maintenance on 21 March 2023. She said the grounds maintenance contractors always missed the area near her home. In response the landlord contacted its contractors and asked them to look into the resident’s report. The contractors responded and asked the landlord for photographs and further information about the area the resident was referring to. There is no evidence to show that the landlord responded to the contractors. There is also no evidence to show that the landlord provided any updates to the resident, or that it resolved the issues she raised.
On 5 July 2023, following the resident’s formal complaint, the landlord asked its contractors to reattend the site as a priority and confirm the date they would attend. The landlord chased its contractors again on 8 August 2023 as it had not received a response. While this shows the landlord had taken some appropriate action, the lack of response raises concerns with its overall management of the grounds maintenance contractors. It also raises concerns with its general site management as the evidence suggest the contractors did reattend the site at some point in July 2023.
The landlord’s complaint responses were confusing and contradictory. It is unclear from the evidence provided exactly when the contractors cut the bushes back, although the evidence shows it was prior to the resident’s escalation request on 19 August 2023. The stage 2 response said the contractors did not complete the work until 31 August 2023. In addition, the stage 1 response said the landlord would complete fortnightly inspections as part of the resolution. Yet the stage 2 response said it would complete monthly inspections, in line with its neighbourhood management policy.
The landlord did uphold the complaint. It appropriately acknowledged that there were communication failures and that it had taken a long time and multiple visits to resolve the grounds maintenance issues. To put things right at stage 2 it apologised and offered the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the distress, frustration, and inconvenience caused. It also said it would carry out “more estate inspections and works with its contractors” on a monthly basis. However, there is no evidence to show that it did this and the resident reported the same issues again in early 2024. This meant that there was no meaningful resolution to the complaint.
The resident has since told us that the issues with the bushes are ongoing. She said, although the landlord has said it has a solution, it has not fully explained what actions it will take or confirmed the solution in writing. The resident did say that the overall grounds maintenance has improved.
Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, we will consider whether the redress offered put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
Given the observations above, the landlord has not shown that it put things right through the complaints process. We consider the offer of £100 compensation insufficient given the impact of the landlord’s failings and the repeated issues. We consider an order for the landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation (inclusive of the landlord’s original offer) to be proportionate. This is in line with our remedies guidance where the landlord has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. This is also in line with the landlord’s statement of charges and compensation.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	No maladministration

The landlord’s complaints policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in the Complaint Handling Code (April 2022) (the Code). The timescales in the landlord’s current complaint procedure complies with the Code.
The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 22 June 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 26 June 2023 and sent the resident a stage 1 response on 5 July 2023. Both the acknowledgement and the response were within the timeframes set within the landlord’s complaints policy.
The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 19 August 2023. It is unclear from the evidence provided when the landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint. Although it appears to be on or around 25 August 2023, when it discussed the complaint with the resident. The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 response on 19 September 2023. Both the acknowledgement and the response were within the timeframes set within the landlord’s policy. Therefore, we find that there was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Learning

The landlord did find in its stage 2 response that it should have identified its contractor’s poor quality service during its routine inspections. It also found that it could improve its communication. However, it should also ensure that its contractors are aware of the scheme schedule and have established reporting routes should the landlord pick up any issues during scheme inspections. This would ensure the onus is not on the resident to identify issues with the grounds maintenance service.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The evidence provided by the landlord was sufficient to conduct the investigation. However, it did not provide key documents such as grounds maintenance logs or schedules. It also did not provide copies of the resident’s contact or details of telephone calls.

Communication

The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor at times. The evidence shows that it did not always respond to the resident’s emails or keep her sufficiently updated.