Westminster City Council (202105425)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202105425

Westminster City Council

20 February 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:
1. The landlord’s response to reports of inaccurate service charge bills relating to heating and hot water.
2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The tenancy began on 20 December 2020. The property is a one bedroom flat in a tower block, owned and managed by the landlord.
The resident has appointed a representative to communicate with this Service. As such references to the resident will include actions of his appointed representative.
The signed tenancy agreement from 20 December 2020 confirmed the weekly heating and hot water charges as £20.99.
The tenant handbook provides information on how the landlord calculates the heating and hot water charges. The handbook says the landlord decides the heating and hot water charge each year and that changes usually start in April or October.
The landlord’s 2021 complaints policy says it aims to provide a stage one response in 10 working days and a stage two response in 20 working days.
On 5 April 2021, the landlord adjusted the weekly heating and hot water charge to £15.30 per week.
On 8 April 2021, the landlord’s statement showed a weekly charge of £3.12 for the period 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021.
The resident has said he raised an initial complaint with the landlord on 7 May 2021 about the accuracy of the weekly charges. This Service has not been provided with a copy of this complaint. This Service wrote to the landlord on 9 June 2021 asking it to respond to the resident’s complaint within 10 working days.
By 24 June 2021, the landlord had not responded to the resident’s complaint and this Service asked the landlord to respond within 10 working days.
On 25 June 2021, the resident sent a complaint to the landlord. He complained about the landlord’s weekly charges in relation to heating and hot water. The resident said he was seeking reimbursement of overcharges and wanted it to communicate with him. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on the same day.
On 8 July 2021, the landlord’s statement showed a weekly charge of £3.97 for heating and hot water. This was for the period 1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021.
On 9 July 2021, the landlord apologised for not responding to the resident’s complaint and said it would by 16 July 2021.
The landlord’s stage one response from 12 July 2021 did not uphold the resident’s complaint. It said:
1. It had reviewed its records and charges for the property and the resident was being charged correctly for April 2021 to March 2022. It said the charges were in line with other properties of a similar size.
2. Heating and hot water charges consisted of a standing charge and a variable charge. The variable charge was the actual consumption multiplied by the rate. It explained this figure was then divided across the whole year to give a weekly charge amount.
3. The consumption data of the previous months was used so that it could set its charge. It told the resident that some of the data would be the previous occupier’s to enable it to collate a whole year’s consumption data.
4. When the actual consumption was known in October 2021 the charges would be adjusted to correct any difference in what was estimated.
5. It told the resident that if he had overpaid, the charges would be adjusted to reflect a refund.
6. Its method was common practice because it was unable to determine full costs in advance.
7. It apologised if the information was not communicated well previously and said feedback had been provided to staff.
8. It concluded that the resident’s complaint had not been upheld and that an accurate bill would follow in October.
On 7 October 2021, the landlord issued a statement for the resident’s usage as £2.39 per week from 1 July 2021 to 30 September 2021.
The resident escalated his complaint on 30 October 2021 to stage two of the landlord’s complaints process. The resident said he had received an accurate bill for his usage, but the monthly payment amount had not been adjusted to reflect this. He said the landlord had not issued a refund for overpayments.
The resident’s complaint was acknowledged on 10 November 2021, and he was told the stage two investigation would be completed by 8 December 2021.
On 6 December 2021, the resident informed this Service that he had not received a stage two response. On the same day, this Service asked the landlord to issue its stage two response by no later than 3 January 2022.
On 17 December 2021, the landlord apologised to the resident for the delay in issuing its response and said it would respond by 14 January 2022.
The landlord issued its stage two response on 22 December 2021. It partly upheld the resident’s complaint due to the delay in calculating the adjusted weekly amount. It said:
1. It was calculating the adjustment of charges to reflect the actual usage.
2. It apologised for the delay in providing adjusted calculations but said it would provide them “in good time for April 2022”.
3. It apologised that the issue was not adequately addressed in its previous response. It also recognised that the resident should not have had to pursue the issue further.
4. It apologised for the delay in responding to the resident’s complaint and issued a compensation award for £20 in recognition of this.
The resident was unhappy that the heating and hot water charges remained inaccurate and contacted this Service on 4 January 2022.
On 6 January 2022, the landlord’s electricity statement showed a weekly charge of £3.20 for the period 1 October 2021 to 31 December 2021.
On 11 January 2022, this Service wrote to the landlord setting out details of the complaint and the information required by 2 February 2022.
On 2 February 2022, the landlord sent a rent statement and a letter to the resident saying that:
1. The resident had been charged £15.30 per week since 5 April 2021.
2. The charges were calculated based on a previous tenant’s usage as it had no other basis for charging until it had collected new usage data.
3. It calculated the new weekly figure as £3.65, which it had applied retrospectively from 5 April 2021 onwards.
4. It had applied a credit amount of £512.60 to the resident’s account leaving him a credit of £424.12.
5. It apologised for the overcharging and told the resident that future charging would be based on the resident’s usage.
On 16 February 2022, the resident told this Service that the landlord had reduced the bill to correct the usage but had not offered compensation. He said he was seeking compensation for the 14 months he spent pursuing the complaint.
On 3 February 2023, the resident informed this Service that the complaint had been resolved.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to reports of inaccurate service charge bills relating to heating and hot water

The tenant handbook says the landlord calculates the heating and hot water charges on a yearly basis with changes usually starting in April or October.
The signed tenancy agreement confirmed the weekly heating and hot water charges as £20.99.
The resident initially paid this amount until it was adjusted to £15.30 per week on 5 April 2021.
The landlord’s stage one response told the resident he was charged in line with other properties of a similar size. It explained how it calculated the charges and that it would adjust the charges to correct any differences. The landlord told the resident a refund would be issued for any overpayment.
The approach adopted by the landlord here was in line with what the resident was told at the time of signing the tenancy agreement.
On 2 February 2022, the landlord calculated a new weekly figure of £3.65 and applied this retrospectively from 5 April 2021. It also applied a credit amount of £512.60 to the resident’s account.
The evidence shows that, in line with its policy, the landlord reviewed the charges after a year. It adjusted the weekly heating and hot water charge in April 2021 and again in February 2022, applying a credit to the resident’s account.
It is acknowledged that the resident would have been caused some frustration in not receiving the adjusted charges in October 2021.
However, the landlord told the resident at the outset how it would calculate heating and hot water usage. It issued regular quarterly statements informing the resident of his actual usage. It then used this information to calculate the yearly usage. The landlord acted reasonably in applying credit to the resident’s account and apologising for any confusion caused and the resident has confirmed that the landlord has resolved his complaint.
The landlord’s response to the complaint was therefore proportionate to the impact that its actions had on the resident and the landlord has offered redress to the resident which resolves the complaint satisfactorily. The resident has also confirmed that he considers the complaint to be fully resolved.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord issued its stage two response 38 working days after the resident made a request for a stage two escalation. This was not in line with its 2021 complaints policy and was 18 working days over the 20 working day timeframe set out in its policy.
In its stage two response the landlord acknowledged the delay in responding. It acted fairly in offering an apology for the delay and offered a payment of £20 in recognition of this.
An apology and compensation of £20 in recognition of the delay to respond to the stage two complaint was reasonable as the delay in responding to the stage two complaint did not significantly affect the overall outcome for the resident. Therefore, the compensation amount offered by the landlord was broadly reasonable to recognise the impact the delay caused.
For the reasons set out above, the landlord has offered redress to the resident which resolves the complaint satisfactory.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress for:
1. Its failures in its response to reports of inaccurate service charge bills relating to heating and hot water.
2. Its complaint handling failures.

Reasons

The landlord acted reasonably in applying credit to the resident’s account for overpayments made in 2021. It also explained its process for calculating charges and apologised for any confusion caused. The resident has explained he considers the matter to be resolved.
The landlord has acknowledged the delay in issuing its stage two response. It demonstrated its attempts to put things right in its apology and offer of compensation.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord pays the resident £20 as previously agreed if it has not already done so.