Haringey London Borough Council (202208301)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202208301

Haringey London Borough Council

10 July 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 the resident’s rent account.
2. The landlord’s complaint handling has also been investigated.

Background

3. The resident has a joint secure tenancy and lives in a house.
4. On 16 July 2021, the landlord’s internal records show the resident’s housing benefit was suspended after the landlord had assessed the resident’s income and discovered it was too high to qualify for housing benefit. The landlord contacted the resident afterwards to advise £15,166.12 was owed in housing benefit overpayment.
5. Following the resident’s appeal, the landlord determined the housing benefit overpayment would have been avoided if it had followed it’s own procedures regarding the proof of income the resident had provided. The landlord advised it would be writing off the £15,166.12 overpayment and the resident would not need to pay this amount back.
6. The resident logged a complaint on 28 June 2022 because of the rent arrears on her account and unpaid council tax. The resident states the landlord failed to make her aware of the debt until March 2022. The resident stated she had previously asked the landlord how much rent and council tax had to be paid in November 2021, after the housing benefit payments had been stopped. She stated that the landlord had advised the rent changes would not happen until March 2022 and she was to carry on paying the same rent amount. The resident believed the outstanding debt was a result of the landlord’s negligence.
7. On 12 July 2022 the landlord provided the resident with a stage one complaint response. The landlord stated the resident was sent a letter in March 2021 advising the rent was being increased to £113.58 a week from 5 April 2021. The letter advised the resident’s weekly housing benefit was increasing to £97.81 as a result of the rent increase, and the resident’s monthly direct debits would now be £73.53 to cover the shortfall.
8. The landlord had then identified a mistake with the resident’s housing benefit in July 2021. It discovered that due to the resident’s income, she had not been entitled to housing benefit. The housing benefit overpayment was then written off in September 2021. The resident had continued to pay £73.53 per month in rent after being advised she was no longer entitled to housing benefit, which resulted in the rent account falling into arrears.
9. The landlord had attempted to contact the resident on 16 July 2021, after it had received a suspension/cancellation notification from the housing benefit team. Letters informing the resident of the arrears were also sent on 5 October 2021 and 13 December 2021. The resident’s daughter had contacted the housing benefit team in December 2021, after receiving the arrears letter.
10. The resident was advised of an annual rent increase to £118.24 in March 2022. A Notice Of Seeking Possession order (NOSP) was served to the resident on 24 March 2022 because the amount of arrears had increased. The resident had also increased the monthly direct debit to £512.37 from April 2022. However, this increase only covered the rent and not any of the outstanding arrears.
11. The landlord contacted the resident in June 2022 in order to attempt to make an arrears repayment plan. The landlord advised the NOSP expired on 25 April 2022 and the next step would be a court referral. It stated no further action would be taken if the arrears were immediately cleared or if the resident set up a repayment plan.
12. The landlord also apologised for failing to provide a good service regarding its communication with the resident. The landlord advised it had learnt lessons from the resident’s complaint and recognised the need to improve its internal communication between the housing benefit and income teams.
13. The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on 17 July 2022 because she disputed the arrears. The resident stated the landlord failed to previously send letters detailing the new rent amount to be paid and what date this would apply from. The resident felt the arrears would have been avoided had the landlord communicated effectively. She also stated the housing benefit team should have forwarded her correspondence to the correct team. The resident felt the landlord’s lack of action resulted in the arrears accruing each month.
14. On 30 September 2022 the landlord provided a stage two complaint response. It reiterated its initial attempt to engage with the resident on 16 July 2021 and the letters sent in October 2021 and December 2021 concerning the arrears. The landlord advised the resident’s income officer had also been trying to resolve the issue of why the resident’s housing benefit had been stopped. The landlord confirmed the resident was not entitled to housing benefit because of her income (state and private pensions). The landlord advised it would get in touch with the resident to help her enter into a repayment agreement.
15. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 7 October 2022 because she felt the landlord were responsible for the arrears. As a resolution, the resident would like the landlord to waive all the arrears.

Scope of investigation

16. The resident has referenced she suffers from chronic COPD, asthma, heart condition, blood pressure and cholesterol problem and the landlord’s handling of the rent account caused stress and exasperated her health complications. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments about the impacts on her health. However, we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Therefore, we cannot determine whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s handling of the rent account and problems with the resident’s health. This would be more appropriately dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts or liability insurance. The courts can call on medical experts and make legally binding judgements. The Services’ decision not to consider this aspect of the resident’s complaint is within accordance of paragraph 42(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme), which says “the Ombudsman will not consider complaints which 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”. The Service has considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident as well as the landlord’s response to her concerns about her health.
17. The resident has also complained about council tax arrears. Paragraph 42 (k) of the Scheme sets out that “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”. The Ombudsman can only consider complaints which concern councils’ actions that directly relate to their role as social landlords. Council tax is payable regardless of whether someone is a tenant of the landlord. Therefore, it is not directly linked to the council’s role as a social landlord and the Ombudsman cannot consider this aspect of the complaint. The resident may wish to contact the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman for further assistance about the handling of her council tax arrears.

Assessment and findings

18. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
    1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;
    2. put things right, and;
    3. learn from outcomes.
19. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

Policies and procedures

20. At the time the resident logged her complaint the landlord’s complaints policy stated it would aim to provide a stage one response within 10 working days of a complaint being logged. A stage two response would be provided within 25 working days of receiving an escalation request, unless the person reviewing the case needs to speak to the parties involved and is unable to make contact.
21. Under the heading “Rent arrears and eviction” the landlord’s website states that if a resident falls behind with their rent, the landlord will follow a standard procedure to chase up payment, which includes the following:
    1. The landlord will write to a resident if they get into arrears. The landlord will also phone, send reminders by text and carry out visits during the day, evenings and weekends.
    2. A resident can tell the landlord if they are having any problems paying their rent and the landlord can help and advise the resident on what to do next.
    3. The landlord will write or phone a resident again if they do not get in touch with the landlord or if they do not pay off their arrears.
    4. The landlord can recommend an arrangement for the resident to pay off their arrears in reasonable instalments.
    5. If the resident breaks an agreement with the landlord, it may serve the resident with a formal notice. If the landlord has to take a resident to court the resident will have to pay the landlord’s costs and legal fees on top of what they owe.
22. The tenancy agreement states under the heading ‘The Tenants Obligations’ that the resident is required to pay the rent and other charges as specified on the rent detail card regularly and promptly.

The landlord’s handling of resident’s rent account

23. The resident’s rent account would have started to accrue arrears from July 2021, when their housing benefit was cancelled. The resident’s direct debit payment had not been adjusted to cover the shortfall in rent payment. The landlord advised it had attempted to contact the resident on 16 July 2021 and left her a voicemail. Following the landlord’s decision to waive the housing benefit overpayment, it should have made it very clear to the resident that she would have to amend her direct debit payment to cover the full rent amount.
24. There is no record of the landlord making any further attempts to contact the resident regarding her rent account until 5 October 2021. At this stage the resident had arrears of £1,330.24. The landlord’s website states the landlord would write to a resident if they got into arrears. Given the landlord’s awareness of the rent payment shortfall and the increasing arrears, the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to have made more attempts to contact the resident prior to October 2021.
25. The Ombudsman has not been provided with evidence of the landlord making any further attempts to contact the resident about the arrears again until 13 December 2021. At this stage the resident had arrears of £2,249.95. It is not clear why the landlord did not use any of the alternative methods in trying to contact the resident, as outlined on its website, including text messages and visits.
26. The resident asked the landlord to contact her about the arrears on 23 December 2021 and also asked it to confirm the amount of rent she should be paying. It appears the housing benefit team did not pass on the resident’s correspondence to the income team until March 2022. It is very concerning, given the increasing amount of arrears, that the resident’s correspondence was not forwarded to the income team in the first instance.
27. It is clear there was a lack of communication between the housing benefit and income teams, which resulted in a delay with contacting the resident about her rent account. Had the landlord been proactive and made attempts to contact the resident about the arrears, it would have had the opportunity to explore the ways of assisting the resident in reducing her arrears at an earlier stage.
28. It is the resident’s responsibility to ensure the rent is paid. However, in this instance it would not be reasonable or fair to lay sole responsibility with the resident because it was the landlord’s responsibility to contact the resident about her arrears in a timely manner. This failure in service led to a sustained period of inconvenience and distress to the resident, which could have been prevented if the landlord had acted in line with the arrears procedure set out on its website.
29. The resident states throughout their correspondence that the situation was causing her distress and had a negative impact on her health. After a sustained gap in communication with the resident, the landlord made the decision to issue a NOSP. This would have been highly distressing for the resident and was not appropriate. A NOSP should be used as a last resort when other, informal attempts to manage arrears have been attempted and proven to be unsuccessful. The landlord had a duty of care to the resident, given her age and health vulnerabilities, which it did not show it had considered through its actions.
30. The landlord had acknowledged its failings in communication and apologised for this in its stage one complaint response. The landlord also advised it would improve internal communication within it’s housing benefit and income teams. However, it should have done more to put right the recognised failings and addressed the negative impact it’s lack of communication caused to the resident. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) which sets out our approach to compensation, the landlord should pay the resident £600 in compensation. The Ombudsman may award up to £600 for maladministration, where a landlord’s failure has adversely affected the resident . In this instance the landlord did not address the distress and inconvenience its delays caused to the resident and compensation is due in view of this.

The landlord’s complaint handling

31. On 16 September 2022 the landlord told the resident there would be a delay with providing a review (stage two) response because it did not have adequate information. It is not clear what additional information the landlord would have required in order to complete its review of the resident’s complaint. The information regarding the complaint was held internally with the landlord and was therefore available. There does not appear to have been a clear reason for why the stage two complaint response was delayed.
32. The Ombudsman has considered the inconvenience and frustrations caused to the resident as a result of the landlord’s delay with providing a stage two complaint response. The landlord should pay the resident £100 compensation for this in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. The Ombudsman may award up to £100 in compensation for service failure that caused delays and some inconvenience to the resident. The compensation recognises the additional time and trouble experienced by the resident as a result of the delay with providing the stage two complaint response.

Determination

33. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect to it’s handling of the resident’s rent account.
34. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

35. The landlord is to pay the resident £700 in compensation, broken down as follows:
    1. £600 for the failures identified with it’s handling of the resident’s rent account.
    2. £100 for the service failures identified with its complaint handling
36. The compensation awarded by this Service should be treated separately from any existing financial arrangements between the landlord and resident and should not be offset against any rent arrears.
37. The landlord is to confirm compliance with the above order within four weeks of the date of this decision.

Recommendations

38. The landlord should produce an arrears policy and provide training to staff members to ensure this policy is followed.
39. The landlord should produce a compensation policy that outlines its approach to make right any identified service failures.