Salix Homes Limited (202016108)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202016108

Salix Homes Limited

11 November 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 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s refusal of the resident’s request to either succeed to, or transfer into, her late mother’s property.

Background and summary of events

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a three bedroom house and the tenancy commenced on 31 January 2000.
3. The resident’s late mother was also a secure tenant of the landlord. The resident’s late mother’s property is a four bedroom adapted house with a through floor lift and wet room. The resident’s mother passed away in January 2021.
4. On 2 February 2021, the landlord advised the resident that as she did not live in her late mother’s property she would not qualify to succeed the tenancy as she would need to have been living in the property as her sole or principal home for 12 months.
5. The resident’s MP contacted the landlord on 5 February 2021 to ask that the landlord reconsider its position. The MP contended that:
   1. The resident had been her mother’s carer for some time and had been about to give up her tenancy to move in with her mother to care for her, but sadly her mother passed away before she was able to do so.
   2. Her mother’s property had been the family home for the past 40 years and that seeing new tenants move in would cause the resident more stress and would add to her feelings of grief.
   3. Both properties have the same number of bedrooms, and as the resident required adaptations to her current property which her mother’s property already had installed, it would save the landlord having to carry out the adaptations to the resident’s property.
6. The landlord considered the MP’s request under stage one of its formal complaints process and issued the resident with a stage one complaint response on 12 February 2021. The landlord offered its condolences to the resident and confirmed that:
   1. As the resident had not lived at her mother’s property for a period of 12 months she did not qualify for succession of the property and even if she had been able to succeed she would have been assisted in finding suitable alternative accommodation as, a single person household, she would be significantly under-occupying the property.
   2. Both properties were not the same size, the resident’s property being three-bedroom and her late mother’s property, whilst having a through-floor lift, was classed as a four-bedroom property.
   3. For the resident to be allocated the property she would need to register on its choice-based lettings scheme (CBL) and be assessed in the same way as other applicants, according to her individual need. The landlord explained that as the resident was a single person household she would qualify for a one-bedroom property.
7. The resident’s son emailed the landlord to escalate the complaint on 21 February 2021. In his email, the resident’s son reiterated the position put forward by the resident’s MP that, given the landlord would incur costs adapting his mother’s current property, a better solution would be for his mother to move into her late mother’s property as this had already been adapted with a through floor lift and wet room. The son also said that taking into account the space taken up by the through floor lift, his grandmother’s property would have the same number of bedrooms as his mother’s current property, three, and therefore this would in effect be a straight swap.
8. The landlord issued its final response on 8 March 2021. The landlord acknowledged the supplementary information it had received from the resident’s doctor, which it noted supported her move, and an OT assessment of 11 February 2021 which recommended a level access shower and stairlift be fitted to her current property. The landlord reiterated its position stating that the adaptations in her late mother’s property were a very different type of adaption to that recommended for the resident and that it did not feel that it would be justifiable to approve the resident’s transfer when there were a significant number of families on the housing waiting list for adapted properties who may have waited for many years for that type of accommodation.
9. The landlord ended by acknowledging that this may not be the outcome that the resident was hoping for, that it fully sympathised with the resident’s concerns about her late mother’s property being allocated to someone else, and the impact this may have on her mental health. The landlord advised that it had links with partner agencies who were able to offer a range of support services should the resident feel that she was not receiving appropriate support to manage her anxiety and depression.

Assessment and findings

Relevant agreement, policies and procedures.

10. The landlord’s secure tenancy terms and conditions preserve the right of succession and goes on to explain in Section 2.3(b) that on the death of sole tenant, if they have no surviving spouse, civil partner or partner, a member of the family, may succeed as long as:
    1. They occupied the deceased person’s home as their only principal home; and
    2. They lived with tenant throughout the period of 12 months ending with the tenant’s death.
11. Section 2.4 of the tenancy terms and conditions goes on the explain that if a member of the deceased tenant’s family succeeds to their tenancy and this results in the home being under occupied or unsuitable (for example, special adaptations installed but would no longer be required) the landlord will offer that person alternative accommodation.
12. The landlord’s Allocations and Letting Policy states that existing tenants who are in housing need and seeking a transfer can register on the local authorities choice based letting system (CBL). Applicants will be allocated a band appropriate to their housing need and can then use the CBL system to bid on accommodation that meets their housing needs.

Assessment

13. There was no statutory right for the resident to succeed to her mother’s tenancy and it was therefore at the discretion of the landlord as to whether it allowed the tenancy to succeed following her mother’s death.
14. The landlord explained its criteria for allowing a discretionary succession in circumstances where a close family member of the tenant had resided at the property. These were that the resident would have needed to have lived with her mother, as her principal home, for at least 12 months prior to her mother passing away. As neither of these criteria were applicable to the resident, as per Section 2.3(b) of the tenancy terms and conditions, it was appropriate for the landlord to decline her request to succeed to her mother’s tenancy.
15. It was also appropriate, and in accordance with Section 2.4 of the tenancy terms and conditions, for the landlord to advise the resident that even if she had been able to succeed to the tenancy that she would not have been able to remain in the property as she would have been significantly under-occupying, given that she was a single person household and her mother’s property was classified as a four bedroom property.
16. The landlord considered the proposal put forward by both the resident’s MP and her son, that as the resident required adaptations to her current property, and as her late mother’s property had been adapted, it would save the landlord money if it were to allow the resident to move into her mother’s property. However, as the landlord explained, the adaptations in her late mother’s property were not the same as those recommended by the resident’s OT and even if that were to be the case, the resident would still be under-occupying the property and the landlord had a duty to consider other families on the housing waiting list for whom that type of accommodation would be more appropriate.
17. With regards to the resident’s request to transfer to her mother’s property. The landlord again acted appropriately and in accordance with its policies and procedures explaining to the resident that if she wanted to pursue a transfer to her mother’s property she would need to register on the local authorities choice based letting system (CBL). The landlord also explained that were the resident to do this, she would be allocated a band appropriate to her housing needs and that, as a single person household, she would likely only be eligible for a one-bedroom property and her mother’s property had four bedrooms.
18. Despite the landlord being unable to provide the resident with the outcome she was seeking, the landlord’s correspondence was empathetic regarding the resident’s recent bereavement and the familial connection to her mother’s property. The landlord also appropriately acknowledged the resident’s concerns about her mental health and in its final response advised the resident that it had connections with partner agencies who were able to offer a range of support services if that was something the resident would find helpful.

Determination (decision)

19. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its refusal of the resident’s request to either succeed to, or transfer into, her late mother’s property.

Reasons

20. The landlord appropriately applied its discretion with regards to the resident succeeding to her late mother’s tenancy. The landlord considered the proposal put forward by both the resident’s MP and her son however, given that the adaptations in her mother’s property were not the same as those recommended for her, and as she would be significantly under occupying the property, it was reasonable for the landlord to decline the proposal. With regards to the resident’s request to transfer into her late mother’s property, the landlord again acted in accordance with its policies and procedures in advising the resident that she would need to register on its CBL system and providing an outline of what the process would entail.