Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Optivo (now Southern Housing) (202201518)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

 

COMPLAINT 202201518

Optivo (now Southern Housing)

23 November 2023

 

Our approach

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this. 

In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to:
    1. The resident’s concerns that the property was unsafe/unsuitable to reside at;
    2. Outstanding repairs;
    3. A mice infestation;
    4. The resident’s concerns about his rent arrears.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  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 complaints, as set out above, are not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Summary of events

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord, at the property, since 21 June 1993.
  2. In 2020 the resident reported an issue with mice at the address. A pest control contractor attended the property on multiple occasions and set bait boxes. When checked, these showed no sign of mice. However the contractor reported the property required proofing with wire mesh vent covers to prevent mice from being able to gain access. The resident states there is still a problem with mice at the property. He says that the contractor only accessed communal areas and his flat has not been inspected.
  3. The resident also complained the kitchen required repairs following a leak which caused mould. He further reported problems with structural damage around the windows following their replacement along with evidence of other disrepair.
  4. The resident moved his family out of the property in April 2021 to stay at friends and with other family members. This was because he believed his property was unsafe and unsuitable to stay at.
  5. The landlord agreed to waive the rent on 7 June 2021 as the family were not staying at the property. The landlord also agreed to carry out repairs at the property during this time. The resident said the landlord did not offer temporary accommodation, which led him to finding alternative private accommodation to rent while works remained outstanding.
  6. The landlord has advised that between 10 June 2021 to 10 May 2022 it was trying to gain access to the property so that the necessary repairs could be undertaken. The resident disputes this; and has advised that the landlord failed to provide him with sufficient notice of appointments so that he could be away from work to provide access. The resident added when he has been given notice he has travelled back to the property but the contractors did not turn up on time and he had to leave prior to their arrival.
  7. Meanwhile, in September 2021 a further leak was identified from the flat above which the resident believed was going to cause the ceiling to collapse. The leak was stopped and remedial works were required which the resident states are still outstanding.
  8. The landlord installed a keysafe at the property following a request to do so on 6 September 2021. This was to alleviate access issues but the work remains outstanding as it has not been used by the resident over a dispute about storage of his possessions.
  9. The resident complained to the landlord on 20 September 2021. In the letter he stated he had sought legal advice and as such required further information from the landlord. He also listed the individual points of his complaint that he wanted remedying.
  10. The landlord restarted rent payment requirements in January 2022. It is noted that the repairs remained outstanding at this time.
  11. On 10 May 2022 the resident asked for his complaint to be escalated. He was still not living in the property at this point. The response was issued on 8 June 2022. Although it did not give an outcome to the issues the landlord did say it wanted to work with the resident to rectify the issues.
  12. On 15 June 2022 the landlord served the resident with a notice of seeking possession stating he was in rent arrears to the amount of £3576.09
  13. The resident asked for a review of the complaint response on 27 June 2022. The landlord issued its response on 27 October 2022. It did not uphold the complaint.
  14. The landlord wrote to the resident on 30 November 2022, to notify him that it was starting court action. A further letter was sent to the resident on 18 January 2023 informing him the landlord had now applied to the County Court for a possession order.
  15. On 22 March 2023 solicitors acting on behalf of the resident sent a letter to the landlord for a counterclaim for the outstanding repair issues.
  16. The resident has informed the Service the repairs are still outstanding. He says has been “forced to move back to the property as he has now exhausted other sleeping arrangements but his family remain elsewhere”. The landlord has reported it is its intention to dispose of the property. As a result it will look for alternative accommodation for the resident and his family. The landlord has not yet identified suitable alternative accommodation from its available stock and is continuing to look.
  17. The court proceedings were stayed at the last hearing until the end of September 2023 to allow the resident to provide evidence of his disrepair claim. A formal date to return to court was not set. It is the understanding of the Service that the resident’s solicitor has not issued its response to the claim. As such, a new date for the next hearing has not been set by the court.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 42(e) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern matters where a complainant has or had the opportunity to raise the subject matter of the complaint as part of legal proceedings.
  2. The evidence provided to the Service shows the landlord submitted particulars of claim for possession of the property to the County Court in January 2023. This was on the basis of rent arrears that had accrued. The issue as to whether or not the resident is liable for the rent arrears is a matter of legal liability. It is therefore a matter for the court to decide.
  3. As detailed above, proceedings were stayed until September 2023 given that the resident made a counterclaim for disrepair. As such, the resident’s solicitor will have the opportunity to raise the disrepair and infestation issues as part of the resident’s defence during the possession proceedings. The court will then have the opportunity to make a binding decision as to whether the landlord has met its repair obligation and whether the property is habitable, and if appropriate, award damages.
  4. It follows that as the resident has the opportunity to raise his complaints as part of the legal proceedings, it is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to consider these matters any further in accordance with paragraph 42(e) of the Scheme.