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

Town and Country Housing (202012971)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202012971

Town and Country Housing

18 May 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

  1. The complaint concerns the reasonableness of the service charge and the way it is apportioned.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  1. 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.
  2. 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

  1. From the information this Service has seen, it appears that there is an area of land on the estate which a footpath runs through. The landlord has explained that the footpath is a public right of way and can therefore be used by anybody.
  2. The information provided to this Service is not clear on the way in which this area was maintained in the past. However, it appears that the Council is responsible for maintaining the footpath. The landlord explains that, in the past, the same contractors used by the Council to maintain the footpath also maintained the area, reducing the cost for the landlord. There has subsequently been a change in this relationship, which has impacted the amount the landlord must now pay. The landlord set out that it consulted with residents in 2018, then introduced a service charge item for the maintenance of the area.
  3. The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord about its decision to recharge for the cost of grounds keeping work on the estate.

 

 

  1. The landlord investigated the resident’s complaint between the months of May and October 2020. As part of its investigation, the landlord explained that it owned the land in question, which was part of the estate and as it had obligations to maintain the grounds, it could recharge this to leaseholders.
  2. The landlord provided a final response to the complaint on 19 October 2020. It explained that service costs accrued (such as management costs) “should be split across all of our residents who receive an estate service” and that it considered this to be the fairest and simplest way to split the cost.
  3. The resident brought their complaint to this Service and explained that they did not believe it was fair for the landlord to recharge them for maintenance costs. They also queried whether these had been fairly apportioned amongst residents who were required to pay for the service.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that:

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

  1. The resident’s complaint turns on their belief that the landlord should not start charging for something that the resident has not previously been required to pay. The resident also believes that the management costs are being unfairly apportioned.
  2. The landlord’s position is that the previous arrangements with the Council and its contractors meant that there were no costs to recover from the resident. These arrangements have now ended. The landlord explained that it had always retained the right to carry out maintenance and recharge residents for this. The resident disputes that the landlord has this right.  
  3. This Service cannot issue a binding decision about a dispute concerning the terms of a leasehold agreement or make a binding decision for a dispute about liability to pay rent or service charge items. This is a matter for the First-tier Tribunal. I am therefore satisfied that this is not a complaint which the Ombudsman can consider further.