London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202013643)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202013643

London & Quadrant H T

29 June 2021

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

The resident has complained about the following issues:
1. That service charges for maintaining and operating a door entry system are too high.
2. That the landlord cannot, or should not, recharge her for the full cost of this item.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

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.
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

The communal front door in the resident’s building services two flats.
The resident received their 20/21 service charge statement and found that there had been an increase in the door entry service charges.
Unhappy with the increase, the resident raised a complaint, advising the landlord that they did not understand why they should be liable for the installation and maintenance of the door entry system as the door is also used by landlord staff and contractors.
The landlord responded advising that the charges had increased as a result of increased expenditure on the door entry system in previous years. They advised that the cost had been split equally between all residents to ensure the charge applied was both fair and reasonable.
Unhappy with this response, the resident referred their complaint to this Service.

Reasons

Paragraph 39 (g) and (i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme of the Scheme states that

The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion

(g)concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of rent or service charge increase.

(i) 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

The resident has been clear that their complaint is about whether they and their neighbour should be liable for the full cost of servicing and maintaining the door entry system. They have also explained that they believe the cost for this item is too high.
The landlord’s position is that the costs reflect their expenditure on the door entry system, and that the charges have been split equally between the residents, who are liable under their tenancy agreement to pay
As set out above, paragraph 39 (g) of the Scheme sets out that we cannot consider complaints about the reasonableness of service charges. I am therefore satisfied that the Ombudsman cannot consider this part of the complaint.
The other part of the resident’s complaint turns on a dispute about whether the landlord has interpreted the tenancy correctly and, consequently, whether it can recharge this item to the resident who disputes liability to pay for this. Disputes about the terms of a tenancy or leasehold agreement are a matter for the First-tier Tribunal, which can also consider complaints about the level of rent and service charges. In accordance with paragraph 39 (i) of the Scheme, the Ombudsman cannot consider this part of the resident’s complaint.
If the resident wishes to pursue the matter further, they may wish to contact Citizens Advice or Shelter for assistance, or consider seeking their own legal advice: