Clarion Housing Association Limited (202103089)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202103089

Clarion Housing Association Limited

10 March 2022

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 concerns damage to the resident’s possessions.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

2. 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.
3. 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

4. The resident provided information to this service stating that they were successful in bringing a disrepair claim against their landlord. As part of the resolution of that claim, they temporarily moved from their property (a decant) in 2017, so that repairs could be carried out.
5. When the resident was decanted from their property, they left some of their possessions in situ. The resident’s complaint concerns damage to these possessions, which the resident states was caused by the landlord’s operatives. This service understands that the damage occurred sometime shortly after the decant in 2017.
6. The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord about the damage to their possessions. The landlord provided its final response to the complaint on 15 November 2021 in which it explained that its policy prevented it from considering complaints about damage to possessions and the matter would be referred to its insurers.
7. A copy of the landlord’s final response was provided, and, between November 2021 and February 2022, the resident provided further information. This showed that they had made a claim to the landlord’s insurers but were unhappy with the settlement that it offered.
8. The resident asked this service to investigate the complaint, explaining they were unhappy with the landlord’s refusal to accept liability for damage to their possessions and the level of compensation offered by the landlord’s insurers.

Reasons

9. Paragraph 39 (i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme sets out that “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, concern matters 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”
10. The resident’s complaint is that the landlord’s operatives damaged their possessions and is liable for the loss. In its response to the resident, the landlord did not accept liability for the damage. Determining liability for loss and quantifying the extent of any resulting damages is a matter for the Courts.
11. Further to this, the resident has provided information showing that they have also made a claim to the landlord’s insurers and are dissatisfied with the settlement it offered. Disputes about the outcome of an insurance claim would also usually be a matter for the Courts.
12. For these reasons, the Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint.