Anchor Hanover Group (202015214)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202015214

Anchor Hanover Group

3 December 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 handling of  the resident’s concerns about the increase in his service charges and the explanation provided by the landlord for the increases.

Jurisdiction

  1. 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.
  2. After carefully considering all the evidence, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction

Summary of events

  1. In December 2020, the landlord issued the annual letter for the service charge budget and invited its residents to provide their comments. On 16 December 2020, the resident contacted the landlord requesting a detailed breakdown and explanation of the service charges for the financial year 2021/22 and requested an explanation for the discrepancy in the charge for pensions. He also informed the landlord that he had several questions that required an answer.
  2. On 17 December 2020, the landlord provided additional information to its residents acknowledging that the proposed level of the service charge increase was a concern for residents, advised that the budget pack contained draft figures and the consultation period gave the opportunity for review of the figures and for suggestions to be made. In addition, the landlord identified and set out the main areas of the service charge that were subject to an increase.
  3. The landlords’ responses to the resident’s complaints on 21 December 2020 and February 2021 acknowledged his concerns over the increases to the service charge and his request for a breakdown of the budget. The complaint responses advised that his queries would be addressed once the consultation was concluded, explained that comprehensive information had already been provided and gave more detail about the areas with increased expenditure.
  4. The resident approached this Service on 3 March 2021 to advise that he remained unhappy with the explanation provided by the landlord for the service charge increase, he believed the level of charge was excessive and that he is being overcharged. The landlord had advised that the increase in charges were due to the painting of the properties but most of the properties did not require painting.  In addition, the resident advised that that the breakdown of the service charge he had received was not transparent as it lacked detail about where the money had been spent.

Reasons

  1. This complaint is about the resident’s concerns about the increase in his service charges, it relates to the level, and reasonableness, of the service charges and the associated increase for the 2021/22 financial year.
  2. Paragraph 39(g) of the Ombudsman’s Scheme states that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase.
  3. In addition, paragraph 39(i) of the Ombudsman’s Scheme also states that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure.
  4. The Ombudsman does not have the jurisdiction to investigate this complaint because, firstly, it is about the increase of the service charge, and secondly, the appropriate body that has jurisdiction to consider such complaints is the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
  5. The First-tier Tribunal can determine the appropriate level and amount of service charges recoverable by a landlord; decide if the charges were reasonably incurred; by whom they are payable, and when. It would therefore be more reasonable and effective for the resident to seek a determination on the reasonableness of the service charge and/or the increase from the Tribunal.
  6. The details of the Tribunal are as follows:

The First-Tier Tribunal ( Property Chamber)

10 Alfred Place

London

WC1E 7LR

Email:  rplondon@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Telephone 0207 446 7700.