The Guinness Partnership Limited (202203314)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202203314

The Guinness Partnership Limited

30 March 2023

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. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of rent arrears accrued at a previous address.

Background

2. At the beginning of the period covered by the complaint, the resident was an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. Records show that the resident viewed a property managed by the landlord with her support worker. She accepted the property and the tenancy began on 16 March 2021. Following this, at the beginning of April 2021, the resident’s social worker informed the landlord that the property was not suitable for the resident’s needs, and that the resident wished to end the tenancy and search for a new property.
3. The landlord responded that it had not been made aware of the issues prior to the signing of the tenancy agreement, and that if the resident wanted to end the agreement early, she would need to submit a notice to quit (NTQ). It explained that this had a notice period of four weeks although it stated it would be able to consider two weeks if further information was provided regarding why the property was unsuitable. The resident emailed the landlord to give notice on 8 June 2021 and the tenancy subsequently ended on 11 July 2021.
4. During this period, the resident did not pay any rent, and did not move into the property. The landlord maintained that as she had signed a tenancy agreement, she was liable to pay the arrears that had accrued. The amount that was finally owed was £1360, and the landlord attempted to chase this payment by sending letters to the resident.
5. On 8 April 2022, the resident submitted a stage one complaint, in which she asked for the landlord to write off the arrears as a gesture of goodwill. The resident felt that as the landlord had been informed the property was not suitable for her needs at the beginning of April, it would be unfair to charge her for rent for the months she was not at the property.
6. The landlord’s final response maintained that it had not been made aware of any concerns with regards to the suitability of the property. It also maintained that it had followed its procedures accordingly, and that whilst it understood the distress experienced by the resident, she was still liable to pay the overdue rent. However, the landlord did offer to deduct £200 from the amount owed as a goodwill gesture. This brought the arrears down to a total of £1160. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and told this Service that she still wanted the whole amount to be written off, noting that the rent would have been covered by Housing Benefit.

Assessment and findings

Policies & Procedures

7. Section 29 of the landlord’s arrears policy advises that “[the landlord aims] to recover rent… and other arrears as quickly as possible. [The landlord] will take income and individual circumstances into account to ensure repayments are affordable”.
8. Section 33 of the landlord’s arrears policy states that “if sufficient repayments are still not being made despite all [of its] efforts to provide support, then as a last resort, [the landlord] will start court proceedings”.

Scope of Investigation

9. The resident advised that she was entitled to housing benefits and, therefore, would not have been paying the rent herself had she remained in the property. The resident had asked the landlord to consider this. However, this Service is unable to comment on this, as the purpose of this investigation is to determine whether the landlord had acted appropriately and reasonably in line with its policies and procedures. Concerns regarding housing benefit entitlement, should this remain an issue for the resident, should be taken up with the local authority or any support services who were responsible for submitting such an application.

The landlord’s handling of rent arrears accrued at a previous address

10. This Service acknowledges the distress experienced by the resident both prior to the letting of the property and once she had signed the tenancy. It is not disputed that the experience was likely to have been difficult for the resident and her family. However, the purpose of this investigation is to determine whether there was further detriment caused as a result of any failure in service by the landlord.
11. The landlord’s responsibility was to ensure that it provided a lettings service in line with its policies and procedures. Additionally, it should have ensured that communication with the resident was clear, consistent, and informative.
12. There was no dispute that the landlord was not made aware of any concerns regarding the resident’s vulnerabilities or the suitability of the property prior to the resident signing the tenancy agreement. It is noted that the landlord’s records indicate the resident’s support worker, who also attended the viewing, did not raise any concerns during the viewing or sign-up process. Therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord to have treated the tenancy as a standard letting.
13. Once it was made aware of potential issues regarding the suitability of the property and the impact these may have had on the resident, it was the landlord’s duty to clearly communicate with the resident and her representatives to ensure she was aware of what options were available for her. Communication is an important part of the landlord’s service delivery and ensuring that its customers feel listened to and cared for, should be at the forefront of its aims.
14. When notified of the resident’s wishes to leave the property, the available evidence shows the landlord explained, within a reasonable timeframe, the options that would be available to the resident. An email dated 7 April 2021 informed the resident’s social worker that it did not have any other suitable properties in the area for the resident to move to. It also clearly advised that should the resident wish to end the tenancy, she would need to submit a notice to quit (NTQ). It also clearly advised that this had a four-week notice period, although it also offered to accept two-weeks’ notice “if you believe that (the resident) moving into the property is (an) extremely high risk”. This was a positive step for the landlord to take and showed it was willing to exercise its discretion to try and reach a resolution.
15. In the resident’s formal complaint, her designated person questioned how it was the case that the landlord had been informed of the issues towards the end of March/beginning of April 2021, yet the tenancy continued for several months. Whilst understandably distressing for the resident to have remained liable for a property that was unsuitable for her needs, it was made clear by the landlord that it was the resident’s responsibility to submit the NTQ and evidence seen by this Service confirms that notice was not submitted until 8 June 2021. The tenancy subsequently ended on 11 July. This was in line with the landlord’s policies and procedures, and there is no evidence that the tenancy ending several months after the issues were raised was the fault of the landlord. Had the resident or her support workers, submitted the NTQ sooner, the tenancy may have ended earlier, and the arrears accrued would have been fewer.
16. During the period between 16 March 2021 and 11 July 2021, the resident was contractually obliged to pay rent. A tenancy agreement is a legally binding agreement between the landlord and the resident. The landlord had not been informed of any concerns prior to the resident signing the tenancy agreement. Whilst the resident did not move into the property for understandable reasons, it was still the resident’s decision not to do so, and this does not negate the fact that rent was owed during this period after signing the tenancy agreement.
17. The landlord was entitled to seek relevant rent payments from the resident after the tenancy had been terminated. It was also reasonable that it used its discretion to reduce the arrears by £200 as a gesture of goodwill which it was not obliged to make. Furthermore, it was not unreasonable for the landlord to advise that it may take further legal action if the resident continued to not make the required payments. As stated in section 33 of the landlord’s arrears policy, “if sufficient repayments are still not being made despite all [of its] efforts to provide support, then as a last resort, [the landlord] will start court proceedings”.
18. From the evidence provided, it is clear that the landlord sent several letters to the resident notifying of the need to arrange payments to pay off the rent arrears. The resident, or her representatives, would have had the opportunity to correspond with the landlord. Additionally, the landlord advised that it had arranged a payment plan with the resident to pay £10 per month. However, the resident stopped these payments in March 2022.
19. It was reasonable for the landlord to offer such an arrangement as it was aware of the resident’s difficult financial situation. Section 29 of the landlord’s arrears policy advises that “[the landlord aims] to recover rent… and other arrears as quickly as possible. [The landlord] will take income and individual circumstances into account to ensure repayments are affordable”. By offering a reasonable payment plan, the landlord demonstrated that it had acknowledged this aspect of its policies and procedures, and although it still needed to chase payment from the resident, it also aimed to be flexible and support the resident if possible.
20. Throughout the handling of the issues, the landlord communicated clearly with the resident, and followed its policies and procedures to the required degree. Additionally, as mentioned, it demonstrated goodwill and reasonable discretion in order to make things easier for the resident. Given that it maintained its obligations, with no sign of failures, it is the opinion of this Service that there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of rent arrears.

Determination

21. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of rent arrears accrued at a previous address.

Recommendations

22. It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident, or her representatives, to try and arrange a payment plan that is suitable for both parties.