Freebridge Community Housing Limited (202210458)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202210458

Freebridge Community Housing Limited

21 December 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

The complaint concerns the landlords handling of the following:
1. Communication with the residents regarding the regeneration work on the estate.
2. Request for rental payments.
3. The subsequent complaint.

Background and summary of events

The residents are joint leaseholders of a ground floor 3-bedroom maisonette flat that they rent to tenants for profit. The flat was purchased in 2004. The building is situated within a large estate which has been subject to a regeneration project from 2012 onwards. The residents have explained that works to the block were originally due to be undertaken in 2017, however the landlord did not proceed. As a result, the residents completed work to the flat ready for it to be relet when, in August 2021, they were informed that the works would commence in 2022.

Communication

The landlord’s letter of 23 August 2021 advised that it was aiming to start work in January 2022 and would require all properties to be emptied so that it could conduct asbestos checks before the works began. It asked the residents to let it know what assistance they would need for this to be achieved, i.e. alternative accommodation for any tenants, and gave details of who to contact should they require a face-to-face meeting to discuss this.
The residents submitted a complaint on 20 September 2021 regarding the landlord’s communication. She requested that a copy of the specification of works be provided, and details of what help may be available.
The landlord did not log this as a formal response but instead sent a response on 30 September 2021. The landlord apologised if the resident believed it had not been listening to their concerns and confirmed all letters had been considered. It explained that the works would proceed in accordance with the approved planning permission and the design principles used in the earlier phases of the regeneration to other parts of the estate. It advised that the works to the block would involve internal stair cores, installation of new lifts, replacement of all windows and doors, and upgrades and rerouting of all utility services.
The landlord explained that it was collaborating with its architects and planners regarding minor amendments that were necessary due to changes in building regulations since the planning permission was granted. It would provide a specification of works once this was finalised, which it anticipated would be in 4-6 weeks. In relation to the request for compensation the landlord requested details of the rent charged and confirmed it would consider the request once this was supplied. The letter also gave details of the appointment of a dedicated point of contact and provided an interim contact in the meantime.
The residents contacted the landlord again on 6 October 2021. They raised a number of issues that were responded to on 20 October 2021:
1. What was the legal basis for the landlord pausing planned maintenance – the landlord confirmed that the maintenance was paused once the decision to proceed was made so as to reduce service charge costs during the regeneration.
2. That no details of the works specification had been provided – the landlord explained that once the main contractor had been appointed the works specification would be confirmed.
3. The timescale for the works – the landlord confirmed that this was subject to the successful relocation of all residents, but that it hoped to commence works in early 2022 and complete in summer 2023.
4. That details of the procurement and contract time, along with the appointed contractor be provided – the landlord confirmed it was yet to procure a main contractor but was in the process of doing so.
5. That they disagreed with certain aspects of the planning reserved matters and wished to be consulted on this matter – the landlord explained that the discharge of the reserved matters in the previous planning application was a legal obligation and as such there was nothing to consult on. It asked the residents to provide specific details regarding their concerns.
The landlord held a meeting for the four leaseholders who had chosen not to sell their flats on 26 October 2021 which the residents attended. The notes of the meeting indicated that concerns were regarding the parking provision being sufficient in the original planning application. This was an area of concern for the residents regarding the reserved matters as the proposed parking was newly located near to the entrance to the flat.
On 31 January 2022, the landlord wrote to the residents providing an update on a number of matters. This confirmed that it had consulted with its architects, who advised that consultation did not need to take place on most of the reserved matters, although there were some highway notices and transport issues that would be publicly advertised, and subject to public consultation. Once the proposals were finalised it would provide a copy to the residents. It advised them that it would almost certainly be required to add some parking to the green space.
The landlord wrote to the residents on 31 March 2022 confirming it was in the process of emptying the block and finding suitable alternative accommodation for tenants. The start date for the refurbishment to the resident’s flat was pushed back to May 2022 as a result. The landlord confirmed that it had a contractor lined up and it had activated its supply chain, so work would start as soon as the last property was clear, and the works were agreed. It would be writing to the residents shortly with the proposals for refurbishment. The landlord welcomed comments so that it could agree the specifications.
The consultation for the remainder of the site had also been moved back to ensure that everyone had sufficient time to comment. The design of the final phase was still being worked through, and the landlord would inform the resident when it was about to go live.
The landlord held a further meeting for leaseholders on 12 May 2022 giving an update of security and maintenance on the site. The notes recorded that the landlord would investigate the possibility of making some amendments to the existing parking layout as part of the final phase works. The actions from the meeting included that the landlord would arrange an individual meeting with the residents, and the residents would forward a copy of their invoices.
On 16 May 2022, the landlord sent out consultation documents to residents, its Board and the local MP providing information from its consultation firm seeking engagement. A press release was issued the following day. Consultation events were held on 25, 26 and 28 May 2022. The consultation feedback included that the residents did not want the refurbishment scheme as approved as walkways would be in front of their habitable rooms. In addition, they did not want parking in the proposed location. The resident wanted a meeting with an agenda in advance.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 16 June 2022 requesting that they contact it to discuss the refurbishment plans for the property. The letter confirmed that meetings with other leaseholders had taken place, and set out the following agenda items for the discussion:
1. Feedback from the consultation process.
2. Programme and timetable for the refurbishment and extent of works.
3. Specification and works to be undertaken in the property.
An exchange of letters followed where the residents set out their dissatisfaction with the landlord’s communication and its proposed works and the landlord sought to explain and defend its position. It is unclear whether the resident received the letter sent by the landlord on 22 June 2022. The resident attended the landlord’s office on 30 June 2022. The landlord’s note of this recorded that she was angry and unhappy. She stated that she had no contact from landlord despite it stating a letter had been sent the week before. She raised concerns that trees and shrubs had been removed without consultation, that youths were running about the estate, and she could not get insurance due to the regeneration work. She was still unaware of the plans and had not received an information pack as promised by the landlord.
The resident attended the office again on 10 August 2022. This visit resulted in a formal complaint being logged. The complaint form set out two complaints one of which related to the lack of communication regarding the plans for the property and the difficulties she had experienced in getting a response.
Although the landlord partially upheld the complaint in relation to this element of the complaint the landlord confirmed that it had made attempts to communicate plans as far as they were developed at each stage of the regeneration project.
The residents requested that the complaint be escalated on 23 August 2022. They were dissatisfied with the response as, they believed, the landlord had not adhered to the original refurbishment timetable and were unhappy with the landlord’s communication. They stated that they had requested dates and times for meetings on a number of occasions and had been promised an information pack, but nothing had been provided.
The residents made a further formal complaint on 8 September 2022 as they felt that they had been excluded from a recent survey and had tried to speak with a director, but this had not been successful. They again asked for a meeting to discuss the extent of the works and requested the promised pack of information.
The landlord final response was issued 16 September 2022. The landlord partially upheld the complaint regarding communication. It explained that the pack had not been provided due to staff absences. The landlord apologized and offered £50 compensation for this failing. It pointed out that it had originally communicated by letter from a director who offered to meet to resolve matters and it believed it had made reasonable efforts to meet the residents.
The letter responded to the additional complaint and explained that as it had been unable to meet the residents prior to the survey it had intended to arrange a meeting later to get their views. It stated that there was no intention to exclude the residents from the process and it would provide dates for the meeting in a further letter. This was sent on 26 September 2022 given two alternative dates for a meeting, which took place on 3 October 2022.
There is evidence of discussions in October, November 2022, and February 2023 regarding the residents’ concerns regarding the parking and walkways. The works commenced in February 2023.

Rental payment

The resident’s complaint of 20 September 2021 requested that compensation be awarded for the loss of income as they were unable to let the flat, given the impending works.
As set out above the residents contacted the landlord again on 6 October 2021 and requested details of any disturbance payment, and how the landlord would deal with rent loss, council tax and energy provider costs. They asked that this be put in writing rather than in a face-to-face meeting. The landlord replied on 20 October 2021 and confirmed that rent loss, council tax, utility standing charges would be reimbursed with immediate effect, backdated to August 2021.
The resident attended the office again on 10 August 2022. This visit resulted in a formal complaint being logged. The complaint included the lack of the promised payment of rent. The resident stated that they were owed approximately £12,000. They had tried chasing this up but were yet to receive a response.
The landlord partially upheld the complaint in its response on 22 August 2022. The landlord confirmed that there was no requirement in the lease to meet the rental loss payment but that it would compensate the resident for rental income at the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) rate from April 2022. It asked that the resident forward a new invoice from 1 April to 31 August 2022 and invoiced quarterly in arrears from then onwards. The letter confirmed that the landlord would write to the resident to set up a meeting to discuss the next steps regarding the works.
The residents requested that the complaint be escalated on 23 August 2022. They were dissatisfied with the response as the landlord had not adhered to the payment of actual losses as set out in its letter or 20 October 2021. They were also unhappy with the payments in arrears and that payment was limited to the LHA level.
The landlord final response was issued 16 September 2022. The landlord believed it had gone beyond its legal obligation in offering rent loss at LHA in arrears from 1 April 2022. It explained that payments in arrears would simplify the process and avoid the need for any future adjustments to payments.

Complaint Handling

The residents submitted a formal complaint on 20 September 2021. Although the landlord responded to the points raised it did not log the matter as a formal complaint. The residents noted that they had not received a formal response to their complaint contrary to the landlord’s complaints policy in their letter of 6 October 2021. No response to this query has been seen by this Service, although it is noted that only the first page of the landlord’s letter has been provided.
A second formal complaint was made following the resident’s attendance at the landlord’s office on 10 August 2022. The complaint form set out the two complaints discussed above. A response was provided on 22 August 2022.
The residents requested that the complaint was escalated on 23 August 2022. They were dissatisfied with the response as the landlord had not adhered to the original refurbishment timetable and payment of actual losses as set out in its letter or 20 October 2021. They were also unhappy with the payments in arrears and that payment was limited to the LHA level. They remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s communication and stated that they had requested dates and times for meetings on several occasions and had been promised an information pack, but nothing had been provided. They also pointed out that the complaint response was outside the landlord’s target timescales.
The escalation request was acknowledged on 25 August 2022 and a further complaint was submitted on 8 September 2022 before the final response was issued.
The landlord final response was issued 16 September 2022. This responded to the complaints discussed above and also acknowledged the further letter of complaint.

Assessment and findings

Communication

The evidence shows a snapshot of the landlord’s communication in relation to that last phase of a large-scale regeneration project that took place over a number of years. No evidence of the consultation with residents prior to the decision to go ahead with the regeneration has been provided and, in any event, is outside the scope of this investigation.
For the period in question, there is evidence of the landlord communicating with residents and explaining what was happening on numerous occasions. Often this was broad in scope, for example, the resident was told that the works would involve the stair wells, the lifts, replacing the windows and doors, and upgrading all the utilities. The level of detail wanted by the residents, such as when these works would take place, the details of the contractors, and completion dates, was not available at the time the information was provided. There is no criticism of the landlord for its initial communication lacking specific details as this is to be expected and it was taking steps to make sure residents knew what was happening.
Further, the landlord instructed a consultation company to run sessions for residents and it is clear that the residents were present at one of these sessions.
Whilst the landlord’s general communication was adequate, there were times where it failed to communicate as promised: The landlord informed the residents that it would provide the specification of the works once it was available. This set up an expectation that this information would actually be provided at some point. Initially the provision of this information was promised within a 4–6-week period, then later the landlord advised it would be provided once the lead contractor was appointed. Later still it promised the provision of an information pack addressing some of the details but again failed to follow through on its promised action, explaining that this was due to staff ill-health. It is not clear when this documentation was finally provided to the residents.
The landlord has acknowledged that there was a service failure in relation to the provision of this information. It has apologised and offered £50 in compensation of the delays. It has therefore provided a reasonable level of redress to put things right for the resident and accepted its own shortcomings.

Rental payments

The landlord has explained that there was no legal obligation within the terms of the lease or legislation for it to fund the lost rental payments. Whilst this may be accurate, the agreement to reimburse the lost income formed part of the landlord’s offer to the residents. This was set out in its letter of 20 October 2021 which agreed that this would be paid from August 2021 onwards. The resident was therefore entitled to expect the landlord to deliver what it promised.
Unfortunately, the resident had to continue to chase for the promised payment to be made, and the landlord’s complaint response referred to the payment as being backdated to August 2022. This was not appropriate as it had already agreed that the payments would commence 12 months earlier. This will have fuelled the resident’s frustration and belief that the landlord was seeking to avoid complying with its previous offer.
The landlord’s decision to restrict the rent level to the Local Housing allowance was fair in the circumstances. This level is based on private market rents paid within the broad rental market area. The landlord was accountable to all its residents in relation to expenditure and linking the rental level to the local housing allowance ensured that the amount reimbursed was justifiable and reflected the organisations social purpose as a provider of social housing.
The landlord’s request that the resident’s submitted invoices in arrears was reasonable. This would provide an audit trail of the payments made to the residents. There were delays in making the payment to the residents, which required time and trouble by the residents to chase the monies owed. This was not appropriate and has not been fully redressed through the landlord’s complaint handling.

Complaint handling

The landlord failed to recognise the original formal complaint submitted on 20 September 2021. Although it did respond to the issues raised, the matter was not logged as a formal complaint and no formal response was sent. This was not appropriate. Further, the landlord failed to identify this service failure when considering the later complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord has provided reasonable redress to the resident in relation to its communication regarding the regeneration work on the estate.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the following:
1. The rental payments
2. The complaint.

Reasons

The landlord’s communication was mostly appropriate as there is evidence of frequent meetings and updates. However, some information was not provided as promised. The landlord has recognised that there was a service failure in this regard and has taken appropriate steps to put things right through its offer of compensation.
The landlord gave conflicting information regarding the start date of the reimbursement for the rental payments and there were delays in this payment being made.
The landlord failed to deal with the resident’s initial complaint through its complaint’s procedure.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord makes payment as set out in its offer at stage two of the complaint procedure including the compensation of £50 previously offered to the resident (unless already paid) as this recognised genuine element of service failure and the reasonable redress finding is made on that basis.
The landlord pays additional compensation of £200 in compensation to the resident for the time and trouble caused to the resident by its delays in reimbursing the rental income in a timely fashion (£100) and its poor complaint handling in relation to the complaint of 20 September 2021 (200).
The landlord should confirm its compliance with the orders in this case to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.