Clarion Housing Association Limited (202208080)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202208080

Clarion Housing Association Limited

22 January 2024

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 requests for it to:
   1. Maintain the grass in his front garden.
   2. Maintain or cut back the trees overhanging his property.
   3. Increase the visibility of its staff in the vicinity of his property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the property, which is owned by the landlord. The property is a bungalow with a sole garden.
3. The resident spoke to the landlord on the 14 June 2022 about the following:
   1. Communal grass was not being cut.
   2. Trees close to his property needed cutting down or maintenance.
   3. He was unsure who his local officer from the landlord was.
4. The landlord contacted the resident on 16 June 2022 to advise him that the trees belong to the local council, who he would need to contact to request any action. It also advised it would inspect the grass area and address his request if it fell within the contracted area for cutting.
5. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 26 July 2022. He was unhappy that the grass in the front garden of his property was not being cut by the landlord, despite it doing so for other residents. He stated that overhanging oak trees were reducing the daylight into his home (resulting in him having to turn lights on). He also complained that the landlord’s officers were not present around his neighbourhood for him to report issues to. He explained he did not have internet, and this made him feel he was being discriminated against.
6. The landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 24 August 2022. It explained that maintenance of his front garden was not part of its general maintenance contract and was his responsibility. It confirmed that following a check of the HM Land Registry title, the oak trees were on local council land and were their responsibility to maintain. It told him that he would receive a visit from its local officer on 14 September 2022 during a scheduled estate inspection. It had planned to knock on doors in his estate on this day to share communications in person for those without internet or email facilities. It found no evidence of service failure during its stage 1 investigation.
7. In its stage 2 complaint decision of 23 December 2022, the landlord responded to all the resident’s original issues, maintaining the same position on each of them. It explained that cutting his front lawn was his responsibility as per the terms of his tenancy agreement. It provided contact details for the local council so he could discuss the issues with overhanging trees with them directly. It explained that it conducts regular estate inspections and that he would be welcome to accompany it during these, or that he could call and arrange one with it for another time. The landlord found no evidence of service failure.
8. The resident has advised this Service that he remains unhappy with the landlord’s response to his complaint. He is seeking for the landlord to maintain his grass and to cut back the trees overhanging his property.

Assessment and findings

Front lawn

9. The landlord investigated its responsibilities relating to the maintenance of the resident’s front lawn during its complaint investigation. It found that while it does do this for some residents as part of a historic contract, his property did not form part of this and as such it was not something that it had responsibility for.
10. The landlord advised the resident as part of its stage 2 response that maintenance of his front lawn is his responsibility under the terms and conditions of his tenancy agreement. Its explanation was supported by the tenancy agreement, and nothing was provided by him to contradict this. This Service finds that the landlord has acted reasonably by investigating the matter thoroughly to ensure it was providing the correct response.

Overhanging trees

11. The landlord investigated its responsibilities in relation to the overhanging oak trees at the rear of the resident’s property during its complaint investigation. It checked the relevant records and from the evidence provided to this Service, it was correct to advise him that the trees were the responsibility of the local council to maintain.
12. The landlord visited the resident on 14 September 2022. It discussed the trees with him during this visit. On the same day, it reported to the local council that the trees were blocking light to several of its properties and leaving debris in its gardens.
13. The landlord has acted reasonably in its response to the resident’s complaint about overhanging trees. There is no evidence that it was responsible for the trees. Nonetheless, it acted helpfully and appropriately by reporting the matter to the council and explaining to the resident how he could follow the matter up. There is no indication it could reasonably have done anything more in the circumstances of the resident’s concern.

Landlord staff visibility

14. The resident raised this issue because he does not have email or internet and was finding it difficult to communicate problems to it because of this. The landlord investigated this as part of its complaint response and found that estate inspections are conducted on the resident’s estate every 16 weeks.
15. The landlord offered for the resident to accompany it on one of its estate inspections, or that he could arrange a joint inspection with them by calling as part of its stage 2 complaint response. It was transparent with him about its schedule of inspection for his estate and made reasonable suggestions to him so that he could become more actively involved with it.
16. The landlord has acted in line with its neighbourhood management policy when scheduling estate inspections. The policy states that estates with communal areas or facilities will be inspected no less than twice a year and converted street properties with communal areas or facilities will be inspected no less than once a year. Therefore, visiting every 16 weeks is appropriate and in line with the landlord’s policy for an area it has identified as having minimal maintenance issues and low anti-social behaviour.
17. The landlord demonstrated its awareness of the need for alternate methods of communication by arranging door knocking to share messaging with residents. It has also sent letters to residents and had offered for the resident in this case to contact it by phone to plan visits. Phone communication is available to all residents to report issues. These actions were fair in the circumstances.

Determination

18. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of:
    1. the resident’s request for it to maintain grass in his front garden.
    2. the resident’s request for it to cut back and maintain trees at the rear of his property.
    3. the resident’s request for increased staff visibility in the vicinity of his property.