Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202002333)

Back to Top

 

 

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202002333

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

2 January 2021


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 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

  1. The complaint refers to:
  • The Landlord’s registration of the Resident’s home as a four-bedroom property.
  • The Resident’s application for Universal Credit.
  • The Resident’s concerns regarding the Landlord’s use of personal data.
  • The Landlord’s complaint handling of this matter.

 

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

 

  1. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the following aspects of the complaint are outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

 

Universal Credit

  1. Paragraph 39(m) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states: “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body”;

 

  1. The Resident has expressed concern that by the Landlord’s identification of her home as having four-bedrooms she has been denied housing benefit and is suffering financial hardship. This aspect of the Resident’s complaint is outside the Housing Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to consider as it is best suited for the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).

 

  1. The Landlord would be expected to identify the property as laid out in any legal documents. If the Resident disputes the amount of Universal Credit or Housing Benefit she is eligible to receive, she could address this matter the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) and ultimately approach the LGSCO about this matter. This is because the LGSCO can look at complaints about local authority’s activities (aside from their responsibilities as landlords), including complaints about benefits.  In view of this, this Service will address the Resident’s concerns regarding the Landlord’s explanation as to why the property is considered a four bedroom property, and whether it responded to her concerns in a reasonable way.  We will not comment on whether the DWP’s calculations regarding the Resident’s benefits were correct as this is better suited for the LGSCO to consider.

 

Personal documents and data.

  1. Similarly, the Resident’s concerns about how the Landlord has handled personal data of previous residents and how it may handle her own data is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to investigate under paragraph 39(m) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

 

  1. This aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction as complaints relating to data protection and freedom of information fall properly within the jurisdiction of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Therefore, this investigation report will not consider the Landlord’s handling of the Resident’s request for information. If the resident has concerns about the use or misuse of her personal data, she can approach the ICO, the ICO is able to investigate complaints about possible breaches of the Data Protection Act.

 

Background

  1. The Resident is a tenant under a secure tenancy with the Landlord and has been a tenant since 1 November 1999.

 

  1. The property is a semi-detached corner house. The Landlord has identified the property as a four-bedroom property, although the Resident states she has three bedrooms and a separate dining room.

 

Summary of events

 

  1. On 18 March 2020 the Resident raised a complaint to the Landlord as she believed the Landlord had registered her property incorrectly as a four-bedroom property to the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). She had made a joint claim for Universal Credit with her husband and stated that her home was a three-bedroom property. The Resident stated that it had taken years for her family to be moved to a three-bedroom property, which she and her family were entitled to, from a two-bedroom property.

 

  1. She continued to state that if sold on the open market, the property would be considered a three bedroom and the property was used as a three-bedroom. She said that the Landlord’s surveyors would be able to confirm that the property has three bedrooms. She stated that she had attempted to call the Landlord on four different numbers and it had taken her over an hour to speak to someone.

 

  1. The Landlord issued a stage one response to the Resident’s complaint on 8 April 2020 and stated the following:

 

  1. It apologised that the Resident was unable to speak to an officer when she had called to discuss her complaint. It explained that it had changed how it managed phone calls to allow its officers to work from home due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It stated that callers may experience delays during this time as a result. It stated that the Resident had been able to leave a message for her housing officer, who returned her call to discuss the issue.

 

  1. Following the phone call, the Landlord had checked its records, including the documents on the Resident’s file, and found that the original offer letter she had been sent in September 1999 reported the property to be a four-bedroom property.

 

  1. It confirmed that her Tenancy agreement, signed on 23 October 1999 also stated that her home was considered a four-bedroom property.

 

  1. The Landlord stated that it appreciated that the Resident may choose to use her home as a three-bedroom property, but its records reflect the size of the property as offered and accepted by the Resident. It stated that the Resident could request a copy of these documents through her Housing Officer.

 

  1. The Landlord did not uphold the complaint as it had correctly advised DWP on the bedroom size of her home. It acknowledged that she had experienced some delay in speaking to an officer, however, her Housing Officer had called her back as requested.

 

  1. The Landlord advised that the Resident could escalate her complaint to stage two of its complaint’s procedure should she remain dissatisfied.

 

  1. The Resident requested that the Landlord consider her complaint at stage two of its complaints process on the same day. She stated that it had taken years for her to be moved from a two-bedroom property to her current home, she had three sons and was only entitled to a three-bedroom property at the time. She did not understand why she would be given a four-bedroom property and had not received any documents to state that her current property was a four-bedroom property.

 

  1. On 27 April 2020 the Landlord issued its stage two response to the Resident and maintained its position that it would not uphold her complaint. It stated that it had reviewed the documents noted in its stage one response and both her Tenancy Agreement and sign up documents record her home as a four-bedroom property. It had been unable to find any additional information that could change its position and therefore was satisfied with the decision made at stage one of its procedure.

 

Assessment and findings

The registration of the Resident’s home as a four-bedroom property.

 

  1. The evidence provided shows that the Resident’s Tenancy Agreement states that the house is a four-bedroom property. The Tenancy Agreement is a legal document and the Landlord would be expected to refer to such documents when registering the property for any purposes; for example, to DWP for any housing related benefits.

 

  1. In this case, the Resident has stated that the property had been registered incorrectly by the Landlord and her house should be considered a three-bedroom property. She explained that the house was allocated to her as a three-bedroom property when she had been decanted from her previous two-bedroom property, as this was what she was entitled to due to her family size. She also states that on the open-market the house would be considered a three-bedroom property, and that the Landlord’s surveyors have recorded the house as a three-bedroom property in their reports. Furthermore, she states that on moving into her house, she was given a decoration allowance for three bedrooms, not four.  The Resident has said that a separate dining room has been classed as a bedroom by her Landlord.

 

  1. It is not unreasonable for the Landlord to register this property as a four-bedroom house as this is stated on the Tenancy Agreement and sign up forms. The Resident had signed these documents. This Service understands that the current circumstances in relation to income may have caused the Resident distress and uncertainty, we also acknowledge that the Resident has provided evidence to suggest that the property is considered to be a three-bedroom property by the Landlord’s surveyors and states that she was given a decoration allowance for three bedrooms, not four, when she moved in. It is reasonable that the Landlord would no longer have records of an allowance being given and would not be able to provide this given the length of time which has passed since the Resident moved into the property, furthermore, a decoration allowance for three bedrooms would not automatically undermine the Tenancy Agreement and its report of four-bedrooms.

 

  1. In terms of the surveyor’s report, this again, is not sufficient evidence to undermine the Tenancy Agreement as it may be a reflection of how rooms are used by the Resident in order to clarify which rooms need any repair work etc. The Resident has stated that the Landlord considers her dining room to be a bedroom. Landlords are not obliged to provide dining rooms. A dining room can be used as a bedroom, and bedrooms can be downstairs as well as upstairs. A resident is permitted to use the rooms in their property as they see fit; the fact that the Resident uses the room as a dining room does not mean it cannot be considered a bedroom.

 

  1. There has been no maladministration by the Landlord in respect of its identification of the Resident’s house as a four-bedroom property as it has relied on evidence stated on the Tenancy Agreement which is a legal document. Further documents that state otherwise do not undermine the Tenancy Agreement in this instance. It is clear that the Resident uses her property as a three-bedroom property and she is within her right to do so, although this does not mean that an additional room could not be utilised as a bedroom. As above, if the Resident has further concerns about the benefit amount she may be entitled to, she could seek further advice from DWP and the LGSCO.

 

The Landlord’s complaint handling of this matter.

 

  1. The Landlord’s Complaint Policy states that a stage one response would be sent within 15 working days. In addition, it states that it would acknowledge the stage two complaint escalation within three working days and respond within 20 working days. It also states that all complaint responses should be clear and concise and should take into consideration the seriousness and nature of the complaint. When a complaint is not upheld, a complaint response should include any relevant background information and an explanation of the decision.

 

  1. It would have been appropriate for the Landlord to address the Resident’s points as to why her house should be considered a three-bedroom property. This Service acknowledges that the Landlord did not have to address the surveyors report or how the property may be described on the open market as fact when making its decision. Although it would have been appropriate for the Landlord to acknowledge the Resident’s points and questions in order to provide a clear reason for its decision in line with its Complaint Policy. The Landlord does not appear to have addressed the Resident’s further claims that her property should be considered a three-bedroom property in its initial complaint response. The Resident raised the same questions and concerns in her escalation request, which again, were not addressed by the Landlord.

 

  1. The Resident expressed clear concern regarding her current financial circumstances, we would therefore, expect the Landlord to signpost the Resident to relevant free money advice services or internal departments which may be able to offer support. By doing so the landlord would not necessarily be accepting any liability for the Resident’s circumstances but would be providing a higher quality service and showing that it had listened to the Resident’s concerns and taken these on board.

 

  1. Whilst the Landlord’s decision to register the house as a four-bedroom property was reasonable, the Landlord did not provide a clear explanation as to why it would not consider the Resident’s further points in its decision and did not acknowledge the distress and uncertainty this may have caused the Resident.  Her questions regarding why her property would be considered a four-bedroom property given contradicting evidence remained unanswered in the Landlord’s final response. The Landlord has not demonstrated that it has fully recognised the impact of the current circumstances on the Resident or offered support where it could. For this reason, it would be appropriate for the Landlord to offer an award of compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused by its lack of explanation.

 

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its decision to identify the Resident’s home as a four-bedroom property.

 

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling of these matters.

 

Reasons

Identification as a four-bedroom property

  1. There has been no maladministration by the Landlord in respect of its identification of the Resident’s house as a four-bedroom property as it has relied on evidence stated on the Tenancy Agreement which is a legal document. Further documents that state otherwise do not undermine the Tenancy Agreement in this instance. The Resident is within her right to use the rooms in her property as she wishes, although this does not mean that an additional room could not be considered a bedroom.

 

Complaint Handling

  1. The Landlord has not effectively explained why the Resident’s further points regarding the surveyor’s report, description on the open market or eligibility at the beginning of her tenancy would not be considered it its decision to label her property as having four bedrooms. There is no evidence to suggest that the Resident’s questions were suitably answered, and the Landlord did not acknowledge or empathise with the Resident’s report of financial hardship. This Service would expect the Landlord to acknowledge this; whilst it may not offer direct assistance it would be appropriate for the Landlord to signpost the Resident to relevant services or departments where she could seek assistance and provide a clear explanation of its decision.

 

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders that the following actions be taken within four weeks:

 

  • The Landlord is to pay the Resident £100 in recognition of the inconvenience and distress caused by its complaint handling of this matter.

 

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that the following actions be considered:
  • The Landlord should consider reviewing its complaint handling training to ensure its staff are able to address each point of a resident’s complaint. This will ensure a complaint is handled effectively and the resident is supplied with all necessary information regarding the Landlord’s decision.

 

  • The Landlord should also consider taking steps to improve its service with regard to signposting its residents to relevant departments or sources of support, so its residents have the tools they need to seek assistance.