Watford Community Housing Trust (202425946)

Decision
Case ID	202425946
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Thrive Homes Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	20 March 2026

Background

The resident is a shared owner occupier. She purchased her property in August 2022. The resident complained about the landlord’s communication regarding planned works in the communal areas, including the details given about estimated charges.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Communication about planned works.
2. Handling of the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found:
1. The landlord made a reasonable offer of redress to remedy the failures regarding its communication about planned works.
2. The landlord was responsible for service failure regarding its handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s communication about planned works.

There were failures by the landlord to provide accurate and timely information about the planned works. The landlord acknowledged these failures and offered compensation, which was reasonable to remedy its poor communication.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

The landlord did not respond to the stage 2 complaint within the timescales outlined in its complaints policy. We have ordered it to pay compensation to remedy this failure.

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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £50 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failure. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment made by the due date.	No later than 17 April 2026

Order

What the landlord must do

Due date

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £50 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failure.

This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment made by the due date.

No later than

17 April 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should pay the resident £50 compensation offered in its complaints process. This finding of reasonable redress is made on the basis that this amount is paid.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
25 June 2024	The resident complained about the information the landlord provided about planned works. She said: The list of works carried out was not detailed enough and she requested a full breakdown of works with individual costs. She had little trust or confidence in the landlord’s understanding of the money it had requested. Structural damage was the landlord’s responsibility.
18 July 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 response, in which it said: It had identified service failure as its communication with the resident about estimated charges for planned works had not been accurate, clear or empathetic. The resident had moved into the property in August 2022, and it failed to acknowledge it had mistakenly claimed it contacted her about the consultation, planned works and charges in 2017. The previous resident was renting so would not have been part of the consultation process, and its communication was therefore incorrect and misleading. Given the resident was a first-time buyer and the landlord was the seller of the property, it would have been good practice to notify her of upcoming charges at the time of sale. The resident had to email several times for clarification, and it should have provided clearer detail earlier on. It had now given the resident necessary details about the charges. It apologised and offered £50 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.
24 July 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She said: The landlord had not considered how much the issue affected her and the stress and anxiety caused due to the expectation of finding £800. She did not have the money and did not plan to have to find this amount so soon after moving into the property. The amount of compensation offered was insufficient for the time she had spent writing emails and on the phone to the landlord, as well as the upset and distress caused. She still had no understanding of where the funds were spent. She wanted to see a breakdown of the jobs that were carried out and how much each job cost.
24 September 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response, in which it said: It would provide the breakdown of works and invoices in the coming weeks, along with service charge actuals. Under the terms of the lease, she must make service charge payments and any invoices for works covered in the section 20 consultation. Its previous offer of compensation was in accordance with its compensation policy and was a fair reflection of the impact of the service failures identified.
28 September 2025	The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said: She only had 4 months to find an additional £400, and the landlord’s outcome showed no understanding of the impact of its poor customer service. She was still unclear on what works were carried out or were due to be carried out. She had received no receipts or breakdown of costs, despite the landlord saying this would be shared in September. She wanted the compensation to be reviewed as: – The landlord did not share information about the planned works charges prior to her moving into the property. – The landlord had not provided receipts or invoices. – The amount did not properly take into account the stress and anxiety caused.
6 March 2026	The resident told the Ombudsman that the invoice the landlord provided was for all of its sites and did not break the charges down for her building. She said the works done were minimal and did not match the actual charges requested by the landlord.

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 communication about planned works
Finding	Reasonable redress

What we have not looked at

Disputes which relate to the level, reasonableness or liability to pay rent or service charges are within the jurisdiction of the First-Tier Tribunal. As the resident disputed the value of the works carried out by the landlord, the Tribunal may be better placed to resolve this dispute. The resident may also seek advice from the Leasehold Advisory Service.

What we have looked at

The landlord’s planned works and section 20 consultation policy states it endeavours to give as much notice as possible so that residents can start saving for an invoice for major works and that it will supply the most accurate estimate that it can.
On 5 June 2023, the landlord issued a notice of intention to carry out works. It said that this followed a consultation in 2017 to appoint a contractor for decorating and minor repairs in communal areas. It said the estimated individual costs were £469.71.
On 14 May 2024, the landlord issued another section 20 notice to the resident. It said it had identified additional work, and the estimated individual costs had increased to £847.35. It said that the previous estimated cost did not take into account the whole building, which leaseholders were required to contribute to.
The resident said she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s communication about the charges and asked for a breakdown of costs. She also expressed concern that she only had 4 months to save a further £400. The evidence suggests that the landlord calculated the earlier estimate incorrectly, leading to the later increase. The error indicates a failure by the landlord to give as much notice as possible about planned works charges, in line with its policy. It is clear that this caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.
The landlord said it could put a payment plan could be put in place for the charges. This was an appropriate action to try to mitigate the impact on the resident. However, it is noted that she raised concerns about monthly repayments.
The landlord told the resident that the previous owner should have made her aware of upcoming costs. It said her solicitor did not request a sales pack at the time she purchased the property which would have contained such information. It also said it could not provide a full breakdown of charges until the works were completed and invoiced. The resident said that the landlord was part owner of the property and so should have provided this information. The focus of this investigation is not how the sale of the property in 2022 progressed, but rather how the landlord responded to the resident’s specific concerns about the charges during 2023 and 2024. The landlord’s communication was poor in response to the resident’s concerns. In its stage 2 response, it identified that it failed to show empathy or consideration for her situation, and that it would have been good practice to notify her of the upcoming charges at the time of the sale. This was an appropriate finding.
On 6 June 2024, the landlord told the resident the works includedinternal and external decorations, wash down of UPVC products and minor repairs.Landlords shouldprovide clear and transparent information relating to planned works and service charges. However, the information the landlord provided was limited.
The resident again questioned the amount charged for decorations and asked for a breakdown of costs. On 24 June 2024, the landlord gave a more detailed list of repair works. The landlord should have provided this initially to ensure transparency about the works.
It did not provide an estimated breakdown of costs. However, this was reasonable given it had not yet obtained the final invoice. After a further request from the resident, it explained she could ask for the accounts, receipts and other documents that supported the invoice once works were completed. This was appropriate advice, which the landlord should have provided after the resident first asked for a breakdown of charges.
In its complaint responses, the landlord appropriately identified failures regarding its communication about the planned works, including that the resident had to email several times for clarification regarding the charges.
The landlord offered £50 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused. At stage 2, the landlord said the compensation offered was in line with amounts set out in its compensation policy for failures to provide a clear response about service charge queries.
We acknowledge the resident experienced distress and inconvenience due to the landlord’s poor communication and spent time and trouble contacting the landlord about the planned works. However, the amount offered was reasonable to remedy the communication failures identified and in line with its policy. We have therefore made a finding of reasonable redress. We are unable to consider the landlord’s handling of information abut the actual charges as this occurred after the stage 2 response.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord’s complaint handling policy states it will acknowledge stage 1 and 2 complaints within 5 working days. It states it will issue stage 1 responses within 10 working days and stage 2 responses in 20 working days of its acknowledgment.
The landlord issued the stage 1 response within the required timeframe. The resident escalated the complaint on 24 July 2024 and the landlord acknowledged this the following day. It issued the stage 2 response on 24 September 2024. This was 23 days in excess of the 20-working day timeframe set out in its policy.
We have ordered the landlord to pay £50 compensation in recognition of any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident due to this delay. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance for minor failures.

Learning

The landlord should ensure it responds to complaints in line with its complaints policy.

Communication

The landlord identified that it should have provided information to the resident about upcoming charges when she purchased the property. The landlord should consider changing its processes so that it provides the sales pack automatically, rather than upon request by the buyer’s solicitor. It should endeavour to provide timely and clear information about planned works, as well as the most accurate estimate of charges that it can.