bpha Limited (202004542)

Back to Top

A picture containing logo Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202004542

bpha Limited

14 February 2022


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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the administration of the resident’s rent account.
    2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, and her tenancy is part of a scheme which was previously run by a managing agent. The landlord took back control of the scheme in April 2019.
  2. It is understood that in August 2019 the landlord advised the resident that she was in rent arrears. On 20 September 2019 the landlord’s officer visited the resident and used her card to make a rent payment over the phone.
  3. The resident raised a formal complaint on 29 October 2019. She said the officer had paid more than they said they would. She asked for the rent to be reimbursed, and compensation for the anxiety caused. The landlord said it had investigated the incident and did not uphold her complaint. It explained how she had fallen into arrears.
  4. In the resident’s correspondence with this Service, she said the landlord was not clear about its complaints procedure and reiterated her request for compensation.

Assessment and findings

Handling of rent account

  1. The resident is required to pay her rent in line with her tenancy agreement. The landlord’s arrears prevention and recovery procedure states that when a resident falls into rent areas, it will make contact with them as soon as possible and arrange to visit them. The landlord will ask for the debt to be paid in full.
  2. The resident raised a complaint as she believed the landlord’s officer had taken an overpayment of rent in September 2020. The landlord demonstrated that it had taken her concerns seriously by speaking to the officer, and listening to the call. It explained that it had heard the officer liaising with the resident throughout, and that there was no mention of a lower amount being owed. It also said that when it had spoken to the resident, she said she did not know who exactly had advised her of a lower amount. The landlord explained how the resident had fallen into arrears (due to the managing agent collecting rent in a different way) and apologised for any confusion caused. It said it would ensure its officers were clear when they supported residents making a payment in the future.
  3. It is understandable that the resident would have been distressed as she believed she had paid more rent than she owed. Nonetheless, the landlord reassured her that this was not the case. It was transparent, carried out a thorough investigation, and offered a clear explanation as to what had happened. Therefore, its decision not to uphold her complaint was reasonable as it had not been presented with any evidence to indicate that it had mismanaged her expectations or taken an overpayment.
  4. As explained above, the resident is responsible for paying her rent. Therefore, if she falls into rent arrears, she is also responsible for clearing these. The landlord acted in accordance with its arrears procedure by visiting the resident, and asking for the payment in full. The amount paid in September 2020 was equal to the level of arrears the resident had accrued at that point. As such, no evidence had been provided for this investigation to indicate the landlord took an overpayment, and therefore it would not be expected to reimburse the resident any of her rent.

Complaint handling

  1. In the landlord’s stage one complaint response it advised the resident that she could progress her complaint to the next stage if she remained dissatisfied. In its stage two complaint response it did not advise what stage her complaint was at or, how she could refer it to this Service for an investigation. This caused a certain level of confusion for the resident, and a subsequent delay in her being able to bring her complaint forward for an investigation as it was unclear whether she had exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. This was an example poor complaint handling on the landlord’s behalf.
  2. In its communication with this Service, the landlord has explained that it has since updated its complaints policy to ensure it makes clear to residents what stage of its process their complaint is at and advises them how they can escalate their complaint if necessary. The landlord has therefore demonstrated learning from the resident’s complaint. In addition, the landlord has apologised to the resident in writing for the inconvenience caused by its failure to appropriately direct her on the status of her complaint and her options. This is an acceptable redress, in accordance with the remedies guidance of this Service, in the circumstances of this case.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the administration of the resident’s rent account.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered adequate redress in respect of its poor complaint handling.

Reasons

  1. The landlord took reasonable steps to investigate the resident’s concerns but was unable to find evidence that it had taken an overpayment. It offered an apology for its failure to clearly set out what stage the resident’s complaint was at and has committed to improving its complaints policy.