Housing ombudsman reveals rising levels of discontent among housing association tenants
Ombudsman sees 43% rise in complaints
The number of tenants complaining about the services provided by housing associations has soared by 43 per cent in the past year, the housing ombudsman has revealed.
Dr Mike Biles, the ombudsman, revealed that the service had dealt with 5,519 complaints from housing association tenants in 2009/10 - a 72 per cent rise over the past three years and a 42.6 per cent increase from last year.
Repairs generated the most complaints (37 per cent). The next biggest concern for tenants were estate services (18 per cent) and anti-social behaviour (14 per cent) .
Dr Biles said the sharp rise in complaints from tenants was due in part to the economic climate and increased campaigning by the ombudsman and housing regulator, the Tenant Services Authority.
‘Anecdotal feedback from ombudsmen and other complaints services indicates that many people are reacting to the economic downturn by “kicking the cat” and often the nearest and easiest cat for residents to kick is their housing provider.’
Nic Bliss, a board member of the National Tenant Voice, said the figures suggested that the TSA’s work to raise tenants’ expectations had paid off.
He added: ‘This rise is a good thing and it demonstrates the work that the TSA has been doing to raise awareness for tenants of what they should be entitled to expect from their landlord.’
Dr Biles said complaints could continue to rise as employers made difficult decisions about spending.
The service closed 43 per cent more complaints than in 2009. Of the 4,824 cases that were resolved, 63 per cent of those were closed by the ombudsman helping tenants through their landlords’ own complaints process.
The service also issued 458 formal decisions following investigations in 2009/10, which was a 62 per cent increase over the past two years.
Dr Biles warned the service might need to change and add to its 37-strong workforce if it took on the TSA’s role in addressing disputes between tenants and landlords.
The local government ombudsman saw complaints against councils rise from 3,741 in 2007/08 to 4,345 in 2008/09.
Keith Exford, chief executive of housing association Affinity Sutton, said the rising number of complaints could be due to tenants having unrealistic expectations of the sort of repairs landlords could carry out. He said: ‘Some of the research we have done into repairs complaints indicates that expectations are for renewal rather than repairs work: someone will expect their whole roof to be re-done rather than just a few tiles being replaced.’
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (13)
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 7:58 am
Have to completely agree with Mr Exford. Our surveys show the same, that unrealistic expectations of our tenants account for the majority of repairs complaints.
The tenats have the Ombudsman to complain to, but as Landlords, we dont have anyone compiling stats about our tenants. We have about 25% of them in breach of their tenancies for rent arrears, ASB, overgrown gardens etc, but no one ever looks at this side of the equasion! Landlords may not be perfect, but neither are a number of their tenants, but this is never highlighted.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 9:27 am
Well as far as I am concerned the loss of the Ombudsman service would be an asset.
Personal experience, truncated: My landlord changed the Warden's hours without consultation. When they learned that I had taken the matter to the Ombudsman service, the landlord quickly held consultations 14 months after the changes had been put into practice
In doing this the landlord ignored Housing Law which required them to consult.
The Ombudsman's findings ' Well they landlord did hold consultations'. Concurrent with that three Judicial Reviews had just been won by tenants on exactly those grounds. One would think the Ombudsman bearing in mind that the law ignored by the provider and knowledge of these cases would have no option but to find for the tenants, but they did not.
At Stage three of that procedure, to which I am entitled to a witness, my witness could not make the date at which it was to be held and at that time no date had been agreed. The landlord refused to change the date, so I did not attend.
The landlord later told me that my witness was inappropriate because she was a solicitor ! Thus. my human rights were ignored which was to have a witness and, or representation.
The Ombudsman did not censure the landlord for this at all.
Thus, there were two clear cut incidents. One of Housing Law and the other of the Human Rights Act, and the Ombudsman did not act.
The TSA were advised earlier of these infringements but their only response was to tell the Landlord 'not to do it again' !
As far as I am concerned both of these organisations are a waste of public money and should be scrapped
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 9:30 am
Is that the same Mr. Exford as the 20% dissatisfaction rate is okay standard? Same one as on board TSA?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 10:00 am
Regarding the Ombudsman - I wholeheartedly agree!
Regarding the TSA - I wholeheartedly agree there too. I put a serious complaint to the TSA about a housing association, who were allowed to "self regulate". They found a friendly housing industry "expert" and paid him to write a report backing them up, and the TSA accepted it as an "independent investigation" of my complaint!
Thank goodness Grant Shapps is getting rid of the TSA - they are a waste of space and taxpayers' money.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 10:26 am
As a complaints officer I find the HOS helpful and very pro-resident. The increase in complaints is mainly due to promotion of the service, as we found in my RSL - 50% increase in 6 months. We had to employ two new staff to cope and the process is greatly improved.
To Anon with the warden hours complaint - the HOS were right. Solicitors are not permitted unless it is strictly in a non-legal sense (ie: as a friend) and they consider what is "fair and reasonable", not what is law. You are only saying this because you had a bad experience - sorry.
Residents DO expect too much, especially leaseholders. We monitor what is "formal" and what is simply a "moan" very carefully.
I agree with scrapping TSA - they did nothing for our residents. HOS are an excellent service - just need to majorly increase their staff.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 16/07/2010 10:42 am
this dammning report is not even the tip of iceberg about true tenant dissatisfaction.
The social housing sector is the only sector where the customer is always wrong. Not only wrong, but victimized for complaining.
The one who say the social landlord has no one to complain to is talking rubbish. Tenants, on HB or unmployed or just with no means, are denied legal aid to take their landlords to court. In this situation is extremely rare for a tenanant to challenge the mighty landlords with all the trendy and fashionable lawayers and barristers and their beck and call.
This report does not take account of tenants:
1) who do not even know their rights to complain and therefore suffer in silence.
2) tenants too frail or disabled or mentally ill unable to complain
3) tenants whose complaint procedure has been made so atrocious and disruptive and distressing by their landlords that find the procedure of complaining not worth going through
4) tenants who are harassed in all sort of bustle and not so subtle ways in not complaining, like denying them involvement and participation if they do complain.
5) the huge amount of unsatisfactions tenants have with the ombudmsan for being traditionally pro landlord.
6) there are whole estates where as close as 70% of their tenants are being told by landlords to do nothing else with their lives but keep diaries about their neighbours.
Tenants need a return of legal aid to get back any justice.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Prince Ade | 16/07/2010 10:58 am
The Housing Ombudsman is a waste of public money. Ombudsman does not apply the rule of law in many of their findings, especially where the council (LA) have failed in it duty. I recently made a complaint to the ombudsman, which resulted in recommending the Council compensate me for the grievance caused, however, the most crucial point of the company was about the council's policy. In it conclusion, the ombudsman stated it is not in a position to review the council's policy, but I can appeal that decision. I couldn't stop laughing think the Ombudsman really think I have time to waste submitting a further complaint to it office, when it clearly indicated in it conclusion that it cannot look into council's policy. What exactly is the ombudsman's role in dealing with complaints.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Amian Amahar | 16/07/2010 12:04 pm
Whilst there it is true that some RSL tenants do have unrealistic expectations, and by their behaviour add to the problems, there is certainly no doubt that RSLs contain staff members who are inefficient, duplicitous, self-serving, and very conscious of their invulnerability. I have personally encountered these as a tenant representative, and there appears to be little that tenants can do to hold them accountable and effect their removal. Some are, regrettably, senior executive personnel. Others have a more immediate responsibility for many potentially vulnerable customers.
It is hard to think of ways to combat tenants' impotence and RSL's abuse of 'power'. Perhaps the money currently wasted on complex regulation, the HO, and their staff, would be better spent on providing legal aid for tenants, but with legal aid eligibility so proscriptive, many tenants on low incomes with modest savings would not qualify, whereas justice in this arena should be free to all. Blanket eligibility seems currently (and ironically!) only available to those involved in crime! Again, the current law as relevant to housing and human rights would have to be reviewed if tenants were to obtain reasonable satisfaction through the courts.
Big business and career ambition attract corruption. These are what dictate to the social housing sector now. It has long ceased to be the province of those original well-meaning philanthropists who merely wanted to assist the less fortunate.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 12:46 pm
The last thing we need is for the Housing Ombudsman to take on the TSA's role! This is a biased service in favour of landlords, pretending to be judicial like. It is more than happy to rule out-of-jurisdiction numerous issues, if it can and impose only minor compensation which do not stop housing association from continuing to fail. The way it handles complints the service upholds indicates to associations that they can faile to do repairs and risk very little in the small numbers that go to HOS. This serivce arogantly fails to consider the high level of dissatisfaction of complainants and pretends that they either do not understand or have unrealistic expectations. In reality complainants understand very well that the service does not really protect them agains big housing associations and even when maladministration is proven the level of redress does not really compensate for the failures. The HOS main concern seems to be not to have a successful judicail review against the service. Determination are affecred by the fact that associations are more likely to issue a successful JR,
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16/07/2010 1:01 pm
@Anonymous 1246.
Spot on! You have to have used the service to know the truth. A favourite trick is to re-define your complaint. The re-rewrite looks ok at first sight - but the goalposts have been moved and all the sting taken out of your complaint. You write about bad apples and ( after many months ) receive a verdict about very slightly mis-shapen bananas.
Sorry for mixed metaphors!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment