Great Places Housing Association (202106133)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202106133

Great Places Housing Association

11 May 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 is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation, following a complaint about an area of land at the rear of the resident’s garden.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord which is a housing association. The resident was the first occupier of the two-bedroom property, and her tenancy began on 30 June 2014.
The resident first raised concerns with the landlord regarding an overgrown area at the rear of her garden on 20 March 2019. The landlord took steps to identify who was responsible for the land. Records show that in July 2019 an area of ‘no man’s land’ was identified as being the landlord’s responsibility to maintain. The photographs provided to the Ombudsman show that the area was unkempt.
Communication continued between the landlord and resident to try and find a suitable outcome for both parties. The landlord offered to maintain the hedges on a cyclical basis, however it would need access to the area through the resident’s garden or another private resident.
The resident contacted the landlord on 1 July 2021 regarding the condition of the land at the back of the garden. The resident said that the condition was preventing her from having a new fence installed, due to the ground and its height. The landlord responded on 2 August 2021 setting out a proposed resolution that it would maintain the piece of land on a cyclical basis but required access via her garden. The landlord offered to install a gate and ensure staff took extra care when in her garden.
The resident escalated the complaint to stage two, and the landlord provided its final response on 7 September 2021. The landlord said:
1. It would clear and level the piece of land and then incorporate the area into the resident’s garden.
2. That all future garden boundaries will be checked against plans and ownership will be established before customers move in.
3. It would also endeavor to resolve any issues which arise from boundaries between the landlord’s land and land of adjacent owners quickly and efficiently where there is scope for it to do so.
The resident referred her complaint to us on 13 September 2021, as she remained unhappy with the landlord’s response as although a final resolution was satisfactory, it failed to address her request for compensation. To resolve the complaint, the resident is seeking an award of compensation.
The most recent evidence from the resident suggests that the matter is still not resolved. The evidence shows that a quote was obtained for the landlord to clear the area of land and incorporate it into the resident’s garden – but the work has not been completed.
The Ombudsman asked the landlord why it felt the resident was not entitled to compensation. Although it did not respond, it did try to reach out to the resident.

Assessment

The Ombudsman’s role is to determine complaints by reference to what is fair in all the circumstances and decide if the landlord is responsible for maladministration or service failure.
When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
2. put things right, and.
3. learn from outcomes.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code April 2020, (the Code), paragraph 3.14 specifies that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law, and good practice where appropriate.
The landlord’s customer feedback policy, dated March 2021, states that where financial compensation is requested or is being considered, each case will be reviewed on its merits. In line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Code, in awarding compensation, it will consider whether any statutory payments are due, if any quantifiable losses have been incurred as well as the time and trouble a resident has been put to and any distress and inconvenience caused.
The landlord’s compensation policy, dated December 2019, states that the landlord will consider compensatory payments (monetary or non-monetary) or goodwill gestures where there is proof that:
1. The complainant has suffered injury or loss because of a service failure provided by the organisation or a partnering contractor.
2. The complainant has been unable to use a room in their home due to an outstanding issue.
3. Colleagues have failed to follow policy and procedure.
4. Colleagues have failed to act in a reasonable way.
It further states that the landlord will not consider compensatory payments (monetary or non-monetary) or goodwill gestures where:
1. The issue has caused little or no inconvenience to the people affected.
2. The fault has been caused by a third party who the organisation has no relationship with or control over.
When the resident escalated her complaint to stage two of the process on 7 August 2021, she said that she was unhappy with the landlord’s response, as it had failed to take into account the full details of her complaint. Within the email the resident said that she wanted compensation for ‘all that she had been put through’ due to the matter.
The landlord correctly escalated the complaint in line with its customer feedback policy and provided a final response on 7 September 2021. The final response provided the resident with a satisfactory resolution and identified learning opportunities. Although the landlord’s response was clear and applied the dispute resolution principles, it failed to address the resident’s request for compensation.
In line with point 3.14 of the Code, the landlord should have addressed the resident’s request for compensation. This did not happen and amounts to service failure by the landlord and a compensation payment is warranted to resolve this aspect of the complaint.
The question of compensation now falls to this Service to consider. When considering compensation, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider the extent of the errors and the impact on a resident. In this case, the issue with the ‘no-man’s landlord’ has been ongoing since the resident signed her tenancy in 2014. In that time, there is no evidence that the landlord has maintained the area and only offered to. That is a failure by the landlord.
The resident has been clear the area is an eyesore and has affected her ability to maintain her own garden, as required by the tenancy agreement. She states that this has caused leaves into her own garden.
In its final response on 7 April 2021 the landlord offered a suitable remedy. A quote was sought for the works in November 2021, but there is no evidence on which the Ombudsman could reasonably conclude that the delay has been outside the landlord’s control. When a landlord has promised to put things right via its complaint procedure, it should do so promptly. Avoidable delays will add to the distress and inconvenience caused to a resident and undermine the trust and confidence a resident has in their landlord. But there is no evidence that has been complied with to date. That is a period of 8 years the matter has remained outstanding.
Part of our consideration of compensation is whether the landlord has in fact put things right. Whilst the landlord arrived at a fair outcome in its stage 2 complaint response, albeit a delayed outcome, the Ombudsman is minded that the issues with the strip of land are still not resolved. Therefore, there has been a failure to put things right promptly. This would also attract a level of compensation. This has been a further 553 days the resident has remained in the same situation.
Considering the distress and inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident, the Ombudsman considers an award of £850 would be appropriate in this case.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation.

Orders

The Ombudsman Orders that the landlord does, within 28 days of the date of this determination, pay to the resident £850 to consider:
1. The distress and inconvenience experience by the resident since her tenancy started with the land at the rear of her property. This also acknowledges that the area has not been maintained and has affected the resident’s enjoyment of her home.
2. That the landlord did not fully consider the resident’s request for compensation during the complaint procedure.
3. That the landlord has not complied with its offer to resolve the matter in its final response.
The Ombudsman further orders the landlord to, within 28 days of the date of this determination seek three quotes for complying with its remedy to incorporate the land into the resident’s garden. A copy of these must be supplied to the resident and this Service. The landlord must set out which quote it is electing to accept.
The landlord must, within 56 days of the date of the accepted quote, use its best endeavours to ensure the work starts.