Tower Hamlets Community Housing (202312759)

Decision
Case ID	202312759
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Tower Hamlets Community Housing
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Leaseholder
Date	13 November 2025

Background

1. The resident has been a leaseholder of the landlord since 29 January 2020. The resident is a variable service charge payer.

What the complaint is about

2. This complaint is about the landlord’s response to:
   1. The residents request to inspect the supporting documents for her service charge summary for 2021-2022.
   2. The resident’s queries about her service charges.
3. We have also considered how the landlord handled the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found that:
   1. There was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the residents request to inspect the supporting documents for her service charge summary for 2021-2022.
   2. There was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s queries about her service charges.
   3. There was maladministration by the landlord in how it handled the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to the residents request to inspect the supporting documents for her service charge summary for 2021-2022.

5. It should not have taken the resident to have to raise a formal complaint and go through the entire complaints process for the landlord to recognise the need for it to comply with its legal obligations. For it to have taken some 10 months to even provide a response to her request was a failing, which would have understandably caused the resident significant inconvenience and frustration. The landlord then failed to provide the resident with access to the documents she had requested, despite committing to do so in its stage 2 response.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s queries about her service charges.

6. There was a long delay in the landlord providing the resident with responses to her queries and limited evidence of its communication with her during this time. The landlord’s lack of clarity as to whether it was responding to her concerns as a service charge dispute or complaint, and the shortfalls in its responses to her queries about the window cleaning and management fees, resulted in unnecessary inconvenience and frustration for the resident.

How the landlord handled the complaint.

7. There was an unreasonable delay in the landlord acknowledging and responding to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 which would have understandably caused her unnecessary inconvenience and frustration.

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 11 December 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £500 made up as follows: £400 for the significant inconvenience and frustration to her as a result of its failure to comply with its obligations under Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. £100 for the inconvenience and frustration as a result of the delay in the landlord acknowledging and responding to her complaint at stage 1. 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 11 December 2025
3	Take specific action order The landlord must provide the facilities for the resident to inspect the supporting documents for her service charge summary for 2021-2022. The landlord must provide these facilities within 1 month of the date of this report and they must be available for a period of 2 months.​	No later than 15 December 2025
4	Review order The landlord must carry out a senior management review of its handling of the resident’s request to inspect the supporting documents for her service charge summary for 2021-2022. This review should include, but is not limited to: An assessment of relevant staffs knowledge and understanding of the landlord’s legal obligations to its variable service charge paying residents under Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. An assessment of what training it might need to undertake to address any identified shortfall in its staffs knowledge and understanding. By the due date given, the landlord is to provide us with a copy of its review together with an action plan as to how it will address any identified shortfalls in its staffs knowledge and understanding to ensure similar failures do not occur again.	No later than 06 January 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations

In our conversation with the resident on 11 November 2025, she said that following the complaint considered in this report, she had made a further Section 22 requests to the landlord but had not been given access to the documents she required. It is therefore recommended that the landlord contact the resident to establish when these requests were made and whether it responded in line with its obligations. If it has not, it is recommended that the landlord take steps to ensure that it now does so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
13 June 2023	The resident complained to the landlord about its handling of her service charges. The resident said her concerns were: She had asked to inspect documents that supported the Actual charges for 2021-2022 but had received no response. She was not satisfied the accounts were accurate, she had concerns about fees, she was being charged for services that were not being provided and possibly overpaying for other services.
16 August 2023	We wrote to the landlord, following contact from the resident, advising that the resident had not received a response to her complaint of 13 June 2023. We asked the landlord to respond to the resident within 5 working days.
17 August 2023	The landlord wrote to the resident advising she could expect to receive its response within 10 working days, by 31 August 2023.
21 August 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. The landlord apologised for the resident not being made aware that her complaint of 13 June 2023 was being handled as a service charge query and not as a formal complaint. The landlord: Noted the resident’s dispute regarding the arrears letter she had received and offered the resident the opportunity to meet her income officer to go through her account. Said it had found no outstanding queries except for the building insurance enquiry, which the resident had been advised she would receive 30 working days from 3 August 2023. Asked the resident to confirm what period she would like to have access to the accounts and invoice details for.
8 September 2023	The resident escalated her complaint saying its response of 21 August 2023 did not address any of her queries.
9 October 2023	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. The landlord apologised for the ‘poor record keeping’ by colleagues the resident had been in contact with. The landlord then went on to address the resident’s specific concerns: Use of previous estimate and not actuals to set charges. The landlord explained that it used the most relevant information available at the time. Service charge setting started in October/November each year for the following financial year. This could sometimes mean setting an estimate 18 months in advance of incurring the expenditure. For this reason, the current estimates were used as opposed to the previous year’s actuals. Operational managers then used these figures as a starting point which they would then modify for inflation, changes in contractors or service delivery. Pest control and window cleaning charges for services not received. In June 2021 and March 2022, pest control services were delivered for rat and mice treatment on the boundary of the block. This was due to delays in refuse collections which were leading to evidence of vermin in bin areas. The landlord said it believed this was a legitimate charge. Window cleaning was carried out quarterly, but it did not have the actual cleaning dates for 2021/2022. The landlord accepted this should not have been the case but it did hold the information for 2023. Fire safety equipment actuals being much higher than the estimate. The Estimates usually included the cost of fire equipment servicing and testing and a small amount for any repairs that arise from the testing. The 2021/2022 actuals were made up of a number of repairs that were required following the monthly testing of emergency lights. In May 2021, 3 lights failed the testing and were replaced. In June 2021, a further light failed. In addition, repairs to copper conductors were also required following testing. Fire prevention measures to the bin chutes were also carried out. Increased communal electricity costs. The costs included in the 2021-2022 actuals related to the utility bills. The landlord said it had enclosed a spreadsheet with the monthly consumption and costs for the resident’s block. When the estimates were set in November 2020, it was not expecting a significant increase in electricity costs. It purchased electricity on a bulk contract with fixed prices for 1 year. When procuring the contract in February/March 2021, the best prices were in the region of a 30% increase. 15% increase in Management costs Management costs were based on 15% of the service charges excluding insurance and audit fees. Request for invoices, for 2021-2022. The landlord said it had asked for these to be made available to the resident, which it said may take up to 1 month. The landlord said it was sorry for the further delay and would try to get this to the resident sooner if possible.
Referral to the Ombudsman	On 2 January 2024, the resident asked us to investigate her complaint as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. The resident made specific reference to pest control, refuse collection, window cleaning, and electricity. The resident also said the landlord told her the invoices she had asked for would be made available on 9 November 2023 but she had still not received these.

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 residents request to inspect the supporting documents for her service charge summary for 2021-2022.
Finding	Maladministration

8. Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985) states that variable service charge payers may, within 6 months of receiving the service charge account summary, request in writing that the landlord provides facilities for the inspection of the accounts, invoices, records, and any other documents supporting that summary. The landlord must provide the facilities within 1 month of the request and they must be available for a period of 2 months.​
9. On 23 December 2022, the resident emailed the landlord asking to inspect the documents relating to her service charge account summary for 2021-2022, which the landlord had sent to her on 20 September 2022.
10. Given the resident’s request, the landlord was obliged, under Section 22 of the LTA 1985 to provide her with facilities to inspect the accounts, invoices, records, and any other documents supporting the summary by 23 January 2023, which it failed to do.
11. The resident chased the landlord for access to these documents on 8 March 2023 and 31 May 2023 but the required information was still not provided. On 13 June 2023, the resident complained to the landlord about its failure to reply to her request to inspect the documents.
12. Having not had a reply to her complaint, the resident contacted us and on 16 August 2023 we wrote to the landlord asking it to respond to her complaint. We confirmed the resident wanted the landlord to provide access to documents to verify the costs set out in her service charge account summary for 2021-2022.
13. Despite making reference to the resident’s request in its stage 1 response, it was not until its stage 2 response of 9 October 2023, some 10 months after the resident’s initial request of 23 December 2022, that the landlord said it would make the documents available to her.
14. We may not consider complaints about matters that have not exhausted the landlord’s complaints process. However, where the landlord has made commitments as part of its complaint responses, we will consider subsequent events in order to establish whether the landlord has put things right in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
15. In this case, despite the landlord committing in its stage 2 response of 9 October 2023 to make the documents available to the resident, the resident advised us on 11 November 2025 that this commitment has never been fulfilled.

Complaint	The landlord’s response to the resident’s queries about her service charges.
Finding	Maladministration

What we have not investigated

16. We do not investigate complaints about the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase. We will also not investigate whether the service or the costs of works themselves are ‘reasonable’ or whether the service or works provide value for money.
17. If the resident wants to pursue her concerns about these matters, she may wish to challenge the charges by applying to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) or the court.

What we have investigated

18. In the 12 months prior to raising her formal complaint on 13 June 2023, the resident raised a number of concerns with the landlord about her service charges. These included:
    1. That she was being charged for services that were not being provided and that she was possibly overpaying for some services. These services included window cleaning, pest control, fire safety, and communal electricity.
    2. Why there was a 15% increase in the Management fee charge.
19. At the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord had provided no meaningful response to the queries she had raised.
20. The landlord has provided limited evidence of the resident’s contact with it and its responses to the resident. In its stage 2 response, the landlord apologised for its poor record keeping with regards to its correspondence with the resident, which it acknowledged was unacceptable. It also recognised that it needed to be clearer from the start of the process what was a service charge query/dispute and under what circumstances it would accept a complaint about its response to the resident’s service charge query/dispute.
21. Whilst the landlord’s apology and recognition are welcome, this does not detract from the impact its poor record keeping has had on our ability to conduct a thorough investigation of the resident’s concerns. It also does not detract from the fact that the lack of clarity as to whether the landlord was responding as a service charge query/dispute or a complaint added to the unnecessary delay and frustration to the resident. The resulting unfairness to the resident has been reflected in the compensation the landlord has been ordered to pay in respect of this element of her complaint.
22. In its stage 1 response, of 21 August 2023, the landlord apologised for the delay in it responding to the resident’s concerns, which it acknowledged was unacceptable. However, it provided the resident with no response to her specific concerns.
23. It was not until its stage 2 response of 9 October 2023, and some 15 months after the resident had raised the first of her concerns in July 2022, that the landlord provided her with any meaningful response to the concerns she had raised.
24. The landlord provided reasonable responses in respect of:
    1. Why it used previous estimates and not actuals to set service charges. This is because it provided a clear and detailed explanation of not only why it used previous estimates to set the charges but also the process it followed when using those estimates to set the charges for the coming year.
    2. Pest control. This it did by explaining not only when pest control services were delivered in June 2021 and March 2022 but also why the pest control services were needed.
    3. Fire safety. This it did by explaining that the cost of fire equipment servicing and testing included a small amount for any repairs that arose from the testing. The landlord explained that in 2021/22 the Actuals included a number of repairs that were required following testing. It also explain why, where and when each of the repairs were carried out.
    4. Communal electricity charges. This is did by providing the resident with a spreadsheet with the monthly consumption and costs for her block and explaining that when the estimates were set in November 2020, it was not expecting a significant increase in electricity costs. It also explained that it purchased electricity on a bulk contract with fixed prices for 1 year. When procuring the contract in February/March 2021, the best prices were in the region of a 30% increase.
25. Whilst the above responses are reasonable, it is noted that at the point of its stage 2 response the landlord had not provided the resident facilities to inspect the accounts, invoices, records, and any other documents in order to verify the responses given.
26. There were also shortfalls in its responses to both the window cleaning and management charge queries.
27. With regards to the window cleaning. Whilst the landlord may not have had the actual window cleaning dates, for 2021/2022, it would have been reasonable for it to explain what it had based the actuals on. As such the landlord should have been able to provide a response based on what invoices it had received, when it had received them and how much the invoices were for, which it did not do.
28. With regards to the management fee increase. The landlord’s response lacked any meaningful detail. It would have been reasonable for it to explained what the charge was for and provided some insight into why the charge had increased. However, the landlord provided no detail and simply stated the management fee was based on 15% of the service charge.

Complaint	How the landlord handled the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

29. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2022 Edition (March 2022). Our findings are:
    1. The landlord had a published complaints policy which complied with the terms of the 2022 Code in respect of timescales.
    2. The landlord has since updated its complaints policy in line with our 2024 Code (April 2024).
    3. The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 13 June 2023 about its response to her earlier requests for information and answers to a number of queries about her service charges. Prior to this point it was reasonable for the landlord to have responded to the resident’s requests as a service charge query. However, as at this point she was complaining about how it had responded to her request, the landlord should have accepted her contact of 13 June 2023 as a formal complaint, which it did not do.
    4. Having had no response to her complaint, the resident contacted us. We then wrote to the landlord on 16 August 2023 to ask that it provide the resident with a response to her complaint. On 17 August 2023, the landlord sent the resident an acknowledgement and said she could expect its response by 31 August 2023.
    5. For the landlord to have taken over 2 months to acknowledge the resident’s complaint represents a failure on its part which would understandably have caused unnecessary frustration and inconvenience to her.
    6. We are satisfied there were no further failures in how the landlord handled the complaint. This is because:
       1. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 21 August 2023.
       2. Whilst we have seen no evidence of the landlord acknowledging the resident’ escalation request of 8 September 2023, it did provide its stage 2 response within a reasonable time of the request being made (8 September 2023 to 9 October 2023). We recognise that this was 1 working day outside of the 20-working day timescale, however, this was not sufficient for a further failing to be found.

Learning

30. In its complaint responses, the landlord acknowledged that it needed to be clearer from the start of the process what was a service charge query/dispute and under what circumstances it would accept a complaint about its response to the resident’s service charge query/dispute. This was a welcome acknowledgment by the landlord. As such we would recommend that it now considers, if it has not done so already, how it might progress this to ensure greater clarity going forward.