The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

The Riverside Group Limited (202206996)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202206996

The Riverside Group Limited

25 July 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the administration of the service charge.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s associated complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy agreement with the landlord.
  2. The landlord sent the resident a letter in February 2022 which outlined changes to their rent and service charges for April 2022 to April 2023. The resident raised a complaint about the fact there had been no consultation for the introduction of a charge for bulk bins. The landlord explained to the resident that the inclusion of “fly tipping and bulk waste removal” on the list of service charges did not relate to the bulk bins.
  3. In a stage one complaint response to the resident in April 2022, the landlord addressed their concerns about the bulk bins. It said that they had been in place for “several years” and it would therefore not be able to consider the complaint, as the event occurred more than 6 months prior.
  4. The resident made another complaint in April 2022. The complaint related to some of the items included on the list of service charges, which the resident disagreed with.
  5. The landlord provided a stage two complaint response in June 2022. It apologised for the delay in responding and explained that the response was in relation to both complaints the resident had made. The landlord included previously sent letters relating to changes to rent and service charges and said:
    1. The gardening charge was incorrect and would be amended.
    2. The window cleaning charge was set “too low” and would be corrected.
    3. It would find out about charges relating to the bulk bins and why they resident had not been charged for this previously.
    4. It was waiting for cost breakdowns to be checked before sending them to the resident.
  6. The landlord upheld the complaint and said it would provide the requested information to the resident when it became available.
  7. The resident contacted this Service in July 2022 to outline their complaint. They said the landlord had not been “clear and transparent” with the breakdown of the service charges. They also said the landlord had not paid the monies owed to them, following the recalculation of some of the service charges. To resolve their concerns, the resident requested that the landlord remain transparent in its charging, providing an “easy to understand” breakdown of charges. The resident said the inclusion of “window cleaning” and the associated cost was not enough information.

Assessment and findings

Service charge administration

  1. The reasonableness of service charges and a resident’s liability to pay them are matters for the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) to determine rather than the Ombudsman. Under paragraph 42(e) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of rent or service charge increase. Therefore, this investigation considers the separate issue of the landlord’s communication about service charges and how it responded to the resident’s concerns about this.
  2. The landlord’s service charge policy sets out the key objectives when implementing service charges and communicating them to residents. The policy states the landlord will “adopt a transparent approach to the calculation, apportionment and recovery of service charges.” This gives a clear indication of how the landlord should act when responding to a request for information about service charges.
  3. The notice of rent and service charge changes sent to the resident in February 2022 also outlined their rights and obligations relating to service charges. The letter said that the resident has the “right to write to your landlord and request a written summary of the costs which make up the service charges.” While the letter provided a breakdown of individual weekly costs and what they were attributed to (i.e., £0.67 for communal window cleaning), the resident had outstanding questions relating to some of the new charges.
  4. After receiving the request from the resident, the landlord should have taken action to provide the necessary information, within a timely manner in line with its legal obligations to provide information on service charges to residents upon request. This Service has been provided with evidence to show the landlord had collated the breakdown of service charges, invoices and narrative relating to the charges in April 2022. However, the landlord did not provide that information to the resident until June 2022 when it gave its stage two complaint response. While this Service understands it can take time to collate information of this nature, the evidence suggests some of it was available as early as 28 April 2022. If the landlord was waiting for information so the resident was given a complete breakdown, it would have been best practice to have communicated with the resident to explain the reasons for the delay and when it expected to provide a response.
  5. The resident has also indicated the information the landlord provided does not include enough detail about the individual charges. This Service does not expect a landlord to provide a detailed breakdown of each charge in every related letter to residents. However, if a query is raised relating to charges the Ombudsman expects the landlord to provide an appropriate response within a reasonable timescale. The resident in this case requested details about what each service they are being charged for provides – for example, the regularity of the window cleaning service and which windows are being cleaned. If this information is available elsewhere, the landlord should have directed the resident to the applicable policy or website. If this information is not available elsewhere, the landlord should consider including it on its website or including it in future versions of tenancy agreements or the resident handbook.
  6. The landlord identified that amendments were required to some of the existing service charges. This included the “communal gardening and landscaping” and “communal window cleaning”. The resident indicated these amendments remained outstanding when contacting this Service. If these amendments are still outstanding at the date of this report, the landlord should take action to adjust the service charges and refund any overpayment.
  7. This service has found the landlord failed in the service it provided to the resident. It delayed unreasonably when responding to the resident’s request for a breakdown of their service charges and in answering their questions about the charges. It was unable to offer more detailed information about elements of the service charge when this should have been available.
  8. The Ombudsman’s approach to compensation is set out in our remedies guidance, published on our website. The guidance suggests that awards of £50 to £100 may be appropriate for cases where there has been delays in getting matters resolved and the landlord has not appropriately acknowledged its failures. This Service has determined that £100 compensation is proportionate to the delays experienced by the resident and the landlord’s failure to provide requested information about service charges.

Associated complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy sets out how complaints can be made and the timescales for responding. The policy explains that the landlord has a two-stage approach, and the timescales are:
    1. The landlord will call the resident within 1 working day of a complaint being received and acknowledge the complaint in writing within 2 working days.
    2. The landlord will respond to a stage 1 complaint within 5 working days, or 10 if more time is required.
    3. The landlord will respond to a stage 2 complaint within 10 working days. If more time is required, an extension will be agreed with the resident.
  2. The resident made 2 separate complaints to the landlord. The first related to the bulk bins, which the landlord responded to on 4 April 2022. The landlord then issued a stage 2 response on 1 June 2022. The stage 2 response addressed the resident’s concerns about the bulk bins and the service charges. The landlord stated the 2 complaints were merged as they were requesting the same information as an outcome. It was reasonable for the landlord to merge the complaints for this reason, but it was still expected to respond to both complaint issues in line with the timescales in its complaints policy.
  3. The landlord has not provided copies of the original complaint, or any acknowledgment letters sent to the resident. The available evidence shows the landlord had been aware of the resident’s continued dissatisfaction following the stage one response as of 21 April 2022. This meant the landlord would have been expected to issue a stage 2 response within 10 working days from that date. However, the resident did not receive a response until 28 days later, on 1 June 2022. While the delay did not have an impact on the outcome of the complaint, it did mean the resident was waiting for a response longer than the relevant policy suggests. This demonstrated a failure in the service the landlord provided when handling the resident’s complaint.
  4. As per the remedies guidance referred to earlier in this report, this Service has found £100 to be proportionate as compensation for the delays experienced by the resident when waiting for a complaint response.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its response to the resident’s concerns about service charge administration.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident compensation of £200, made up of:
    1. £100 for failing to provide information about service charges in an appropriate timescale and the level of information provided.
    2. £100 for the delay in providing a complaint response to the resident.
  2. The landlord is ordered to make the required amendments to the applicable service charges, as identified during its complaint process. It is also to refund any subsequent overpayments, if it has not already done so.
  3. The landlord must confirm compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. During the investigation, this Service was informed there were missing records due to landlord staff no longer working there. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord reviews its recordkeeping process to ensure documents relevant to complaints are retained and available when required even if the staff originally involved no longer work for the landlord.