Winchester City Council (202333164)

Background

1. The resident lives in a ground floor flat and shares the communal garden with 2 other residents. A year into her tenancy, the landlord told her to remove her personal belongings from the communal garden which included a shed, a water butt, plant pots, a strawberry planter and various garden ornaments.  She complained to the landlord because she said it did not ask residents in other blocks to remove their items.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Removal of personal items in the communal garden.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s removal of personal items in the communal garden.
   2. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s removal of personal items in the communal garden

4. The landlord’s handling was reasonable, it acted in accordance with its policy and procedure.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

5. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with the complaint handling code.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

What we did not investigate

6. The resident said the landlord’s handling of the removal of her personal items impacted her health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
7. As part of her complaint, the resident made a subject access request to the landlord for information. If she is unhappy with its response, she can contact the Information Commissioners Office (ICO). We did not consider this part of her complaint because the issue falls within the jurisdiction of another regulator.
8. The resident made a new complaint to the landlord about the estate improvements and a neighbour’s video doorbell. If she is unhappy with its response, she can escalate it to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure. If she remains unhappy with its final response, she can ask us to investigate further. We have not investigated the new complaint issues. This investigation focuses on the complaint the resident made in November 2023 for which she received a final complaint response in January 2024.

What we did investigate

9. On 6 February 2023, the landlord wrote to all residents to confirm it was completing a health and safety audit and reviewing permissions for personal items in the communal garden. It said it monitored communal areas to ensure they were kept clear and asked residents to confirm what items they had in the communal garden.
10. As part of the audit, and in line with the resident’s tenancy conditions, the landlord asked the resident to remove the water butt she had installed in the communal garden without its permission. The resident was unhappy and said it helped the environment and did not cause any harm. The landlord said it would consider installing one as part of its estate improvements but asked her to remove it by 19 February 2023, after which it would check whether the downpipe or guttering required repair. She removed the water butt as requested.
11. The resident returned her personal items form and listed she had a bird bath, 2 patio chairs, a strawberry planter, a corner plant holder, various plant pots and garden ornaments. She also listed she had a shed, which she said she had verbal permission for. She queried why the landlord asked for this information now and why it did not do this for other blocks. The landlord wrote back and explained the frequency of its inspections. It said the purpose of its request was to confirm permissions for personal items, review existing permissions and identify estate improvements. It said it applied a consistent approach across its housing stock.
12. Following routine inspections in spring 2023, the landlord wrote to all residents on 24 August 2023 to remind them gardens should remain clear of personal items so everyone could use the space, contractors could work safely and to reduce fire risks. It asked residents to remove their personal items which included storage boxes, sheds, plant pots and ornaments by 11 September 2023. To support resident’s wellbeing, it allowed one maintained plant pot no larger than 40cm. The resident was unhappy it did not previously communicate this exception. Although the tenancy agreement and conditions did not mention the one pot limit, it required residents to get permission before placing items in communal areas. Allowing a single plant pot was therefore a positive exception by the landlord.
13. After another inspection, the landlord wrote to the resident on 31 October 2023 and listed items she had not removed. It asked her to remove the items by 10 November 2023. It confirmed her shed could remain while it completed the estate improvements and it would update her when it needed to be removed.
14. The landlord sent another letter to all residents on 23 November 2023 in which it reminded residents that gardens should be clear of personal items. It asked for personal items to be removed by 2 January 2024.
15. The resident told the landlord she had kept her items in the communal garden since the start of her tenancy without challenge. She said she was not aware of its previous inspections and requested details of these and copies. The landlord provided the resident with dates of its inspections and what it involved, including the applicable tenancy clauses. It explained the area was last surveyed in 2019 and the reinspection was because of the upcoming decoration work. The tenant handbook also says communal gardens must be kept clear of personal belongings and confirms it undertakes inspections to ensure the communal areas are safe.
16. The resident removed all her items, before the landlord took action and she no longer stores anything there. She would like to be able to keep more plant pots and ornaments in the communal garden. Her tenancy conditions confirm she must get the landlord’s permission to keep any belongings in communal areas. We cannot order the landlord to allow the resident items which do not have permission or conflict with its communal areas policy.
17. The resident said that out of the 3 households, she was the only one who mainly used the communal garden. She said she took pride in making the communal garden look nice and it was a peaceful space which supported her mental health and wellbeing. She said the landlord’s actions amounted to bias and harassment because residents in other blocks have not removed their items. She felt the landlord only targeted her. We have not investigated other resident’s items and what permissions they may have. The landlord sent letters to all residents in her block and asked them to remove items. In its complaint response, it told her it could not disclose information about other residents.
18. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s removal of personal items was reasonable. It considered her feedback about water butts and gave her temporary permission to store additional plants and pots for a charity fundraiser. It did not revoke its previous permission for her shed and allowed it to remain until it started the estate improvements. It did not take enforceable action and gave her sufficient notice and time to remove the items. It acted in line with its communal areas policy and tenancy conditions. In view of this, we found no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s removal of personal items in the communal garden.

19. We assessed the landlord’s complaint handling against our complaint handling code (2022) and its complaints policy, which was in place at the time. The landlord’s complaints policy said it would respond within 10 working days at both stage 1 and 2. To escalate a complaint it said residents must explain why they were unsatisfied and what they expect from a further review. This was not compliant with our complaint handling code (the Code) in use at the time or the timescales, which said landlords must respond within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
20. The landlord sent its stage 1 response in line with the timescales set out in its policy.
21. The resident wrote to the landlord on 26 November 2023 and said she was unhappy with its stage 1 response. However, the landlord said it did not receive this letter. She wrote again on 15 December 2023 and asked it to respond to her earlier letter, which she said was dated 24 November 2023.The landlord escalated her complaint on receipt of her 15 December 2023 letter and sent its stage 2 response which was outside its own policy timeframe of 10 working days, but within the Code timeframe of 20 working days.
22. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with the Code. In view of this, we found no maladministration in its handling of the resident’s complaint.
23. We have not ordered the landlord to review its complaints policy because its updated policy is compliant with our current Code.

Learning

24. The landlord should consider updating its tenancy conditions and handbookwhen new exceptions are applied across its housing stockregarding personal belongings in communal gardens.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

25. The landlord was unable to locate its permission given to the resident for her shed. It should ensure it has a written record of any permissions given to residents, in particular where these are given verbally.

Communication

26. The landlord’s communication was reasonable. It responded to the resident’s concerns in a timely manner.