The Guide explores the ways in which housing professionals and housing providers can create or reinforce stigma through language, behaviour and service delivery.

The guide is packed with great examples of the positive work taking place in the sector to tackle stigma and its causes:

Guide to tackling stigma

The Housing Ombudsman has shared insight into handling almost 2,000 complaints from leaseholders and shared owners over the last two years.

These resulted in more than 800 formal investigations with redress required in some form in just over half of the cases investigated.

Housing-Ombudsman-Spotlight-report-on-leasehold-

It shows complaint handling itself as the area of most concern where maladministration (including partial maladministration) was found in 72% of cases. Key issues identified are difficulties getting through the complaints procedure, delays and periods of inaction.

The report also identifies 12 landlords (six housing associations and six councils) with the highest number of maladministration findings (including partial maladministration and severe maladministration).

The Housing Ombudsman makes almost 40 recommendations in their report to share their learning.

he report provides learning points on complaint handling plus three other areas where maladministration or partial maladministration are found most often. They are repairs, estate management and charges. It also looks at staircasing and issues related to cladding and building safety, areas where we have now received several complaints.

‘A new lease of life’ is the second in our series of Spotlight reports which share the learning from our complaints and provide best practice to help landlords improve their services and complaint handling.

Here is some important learning from the report’s case studies..

The Housing Ombudsman has released its first combined report into the few findings of severe maladministration it found during investigations in 2019/20.  4.7 million households are eligible to use the Ombudsman’s services, with over 2,300 landlords signed up, including housing associations, local authorities and a small number of voluntary members.

The Ombudsman have chosen to name the landlords concerned in each decision, as well as detailing actions which the landlords were ordered to undertake, and recommendations which were also made to the landlords in each case. In future, rather than releasing one report on severe maladministration findings each year, the Ombudsman intends to highlight cases where it has found severe maladministration on an ongoing basis throughout the year, as well as making use of new powers to report such findings to the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH).

In their report, the Ombudsman noted that they were happy with the way in which landlords named had responded to criticisms, indicating that many of the Ombudsman’s recommendations – as well as their orders – were feeding into the work of member landlords.

The five named cases were:

1. A complaint was raised against the London Borough of Camden, around ‘damp and mould’ as well as ‘complaint handling’; the complainant raised concerns about the length of time it took the landlord to rectify damp at her home, leaving it uninhabitable for a short period, as well as the level of compensation provided to her. The Ombudsman found severe maladministration in the amount of time taken, and in making a “fair offer of compensation”, and ordered them to compensate the tenant £2,000 per year from 2015 to 2018, as well as an additional £2,000 as a result of the delays in providing its offer of compensation, and to refund the tenant’s rent as previously promised. It was also suggested that the landlord should refer a claim for damaged contents to its insurer, and to review the learning which it could take from the case.
2. A group of 29 residents of Together Housing Association complained about ‘support services’ regarding the landlord’s decision to reduce the level of support services at their social housing block, before later being withdrawn completely. Residents held one of two types of tenancy, one which specified the landlord would visit the property daily (and later weekly due to a deed of variation) (Group 1) and one which did not include those terms (Group 2). The severe maladministration failure only applies to the first group, as the landlord did not have a contractual obligation to visit those in the second group. However, an additional finding of maladministration was made for all residents, as the landlord did not properly consult residents about the changes to support services for over a year after the change was made. The Ombudsman ordered the landlord to pay all tenants £250 each, and an additional £250 to those in Group 1, to write to all residents apologising for their failures, as well as to seek legal advice on a contractual issue which was outstanding for Group 1 residents.
3. A tenant raised a complaint against the London Borough of Newham around ‘repairs’ and ‘complaint handling’ in relation to a leak from an upstairs leasehold flat, which affected her kitchen and bathroom and was not fixed for nearly two years. The Ombudsman found severe maladministration regarding the leak into the bathroom, service failure regarding the kitchen floor repairs, and maladministration relating to the complaint handling. The landlord was ordered to pay the tenant £3,850, to take action to deal with outstanding repairs in both the complainant’s flat, and the flat above, and to review its handling of the repairs. The Ombudsman also recommended the landlord should inspect the complainant’s kitchen for further repairs, review record-keeping on property inspections, and arrange for the council’s complaint-handling staff to complete an e-learning course with the Ombudsman.
4. Cottsway Housing Association were subject to a complaint from a tenant, in the category of ‘complaint handling’, about their handling of her initial complaint to them relating to a preserved Right to Buy (RTB) enquiry. Having signed a tenancy agreement, which the tenant believed contained a preserved RTB, when she enquired to exercise this 15 years later she was told by her landlord that she did not qualify, and they apologised for asking her to sign an incorrect tenancy agreement. She was advised she could sign a contract backdated to the date she moved in, but was not advised to take legal advice, nor that she could elevate her complaint to a senior manager, despite her move to involve her MP. The Ombudsman found severe maladministration, but added that neither they, nor the landlord, were empowered to grant the tenant eligibility for RTB. The landlord was ordered to pay £2,500 to the tenant, as well as recommending they consider the Ombudsman’s findings to improve their practice and avoid similar situations.
5. A complaint was raised against The Hyde Group, relating to ‘service charges’ and ‘complaint handling’; the tenant enquired on a number of occasions about service charges for her property, although got little response from the landlord, leading to her making a formal complaint. The Housing Ombudsman also failed to illicit a response to the complaint from the landlord, and found they had failed in their communication with their tenant, finding maladministration. Severe maladministration was also found in relation to the handling of the complaint, and service failure was found in relation to the landlord’s record-keeping. Hyde were ordered to apologise to the tenant and pay her £450 in compensation, give her the opportunity to raise all outstanding queries, as well as reviewing the Ombudsman’s findings and implementing actions to ensure they aren’t repeated in future.

Landlords are advised to read the Ombudsman’s report in full to consider whether there are any learning points which they could take from the cases reviewed.  Registered providers are reminded that the RSH’s Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard requires them to “have an approach to complaints that is clear, simple and accessible that ensures that complaints are resolved promptly, politely and fairly”.

Using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Inside Housing Magazine have gathered information about every single determination issued by the Housing Ombudsman in the financial years 2017/18, 2018/19 and 2019/20 – which is a total of 2,968 conclusions from investigations by the service.

Inside Housing have produces a spreadsheet of groundbreaking piece of research into one key measure of mistakes by social landlords and the number of times they are each found lacking by the Housing Ombudsman – below:

www.insidehousing.co.uk/home/home/the-complaints-failures-index-how-does-your-organisation-rank

Housing Associations (and all Registered Providers – RPs) have is an expectation for you to meet the Regulator of Social Housing, seven Regulatory Standards.

The Governance and Financial Viability Standard requests RPs adopt and measure themselves against a specified Code of Governance.

Most Registered Providers of social housing adopt the NHF Code of Governance.

(Others use the Charity Governance Code or the Corporate Governance Code)

In November 2020, the National Housing Federation (NHF) is set to release its updated Code of Governance after a month-long period of consultation.

The draft text of the new NHF Code of Governance can be found here.

This is the first time they have updated their Code of Governance since the current iteration was released in February 2015, and it includes a fresh focus on a number of areas, including accountability, sustainability and equality.

A period of consultancy was open between Wednesday 5 August and Sunday 6 September 2020, and while a draft Code was released as part of that consultation, an amended final document will be released next month.

The requirements of the code are set out under four underpinning principles: mission and values; strategy and delivery; board effectiveness; and control and assurance. New emphasis has been placed on four areas of governance in the new code: (1) accountability to stakeholders including residents, (2) equality, diversity and inclusion, (3) sustainability and (4) organisational culture, including the key aspects detailed below.

Accountability

The new draft code says that residents and other customers of providers should be given adequate opportunities and access to information in order to allow them to independently scrutinise an organisation’s work, while this must be reviewed every three years so as to ensure structures remain fit for purpose.

Equality, diversity and inclusion

In order to reflect the communities they serve, organisations must publish, at least annually, information about the work they have undertaken to deliver their commitments to equality, diversity and inclusivity, reflecting the diversity of the communities they serve.

Sustainability

The boards of organisations must consider the financial, environmental and social sustainability implications of the plans their organisations choose to implement.

Organisational culture

The culture and behaviours of an organisation must also be regularly reviewed by an organisation’s board, in order to implement those which will best enable the achievement of an organisation’s missions and values.

In order to comply with these fresh areas of emphasis, as well as the rest of the Code of Governance, the NHF stresses that those providers adopting the Code must ensure that:

• the needs and views of stakeholders are given a central role in strategic decision-making
• there is a process by which measures to keep residents, customers and staff safe are adequately overseen, and
• boards must consider risk, testing scenarios in order to ascertain the threats to an organisation’s strategic plans.

We are able to help providers comply with the revised NHF Code of Governance and you can contact us on 07867 974659 if you would like to discuss this.

The annual consumer regulation review explains how the Regulator of Social Housing has gone about implementing the legislation on consumer regulation. It includes case studies and lessons learned.

The Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) has released its annual Consumer Regulation Review, revealing a sharp increase in the number of breaches which met the “serious detriment” test.

The full report can be found here.

This is the eighth annual review by RSH, the report summarises the RSH’s consumer regulatory work for 2019-20, and details the 15 “serious detriment” breaches, as well as outlining lessons for the future.

The number of cases reaching each stage of the regulatory process – referrals, consideration by the Consumer Regulation Panel (CRP), investigations being undertaken, and findings of breaches which met the “serious detriment” test have all increased since 2018/19.

The published findings of 15 breaches, including by both privately-registered providers and local authorities, is the highest recorded by the RSH to date, and has almost tripled from six to 15 since 2018/19. In particular, local authorities displayed a steep increase, comprising seven such breaches, up from just one in the previous year.

The RSH’s report recognises that while the 15 breaches which met the “serious detriment” test related to only a small proportion of registered social housing providers, and that the majority of registered providers are well-run, the record high represents a significant increase from the previous year.

Key themes outlined in the report include: “understanding the requirements”, “oversight, risk management and internal controls”, “taking tenants into account”, and “putting things right”.

The report features 11 case studies, some of which relate to the “serious detriment” cases whilst in others the RSH did not make such a finding, outlining the action taken by the RSH and lessons to be learned, grouped by the type of breach in each.

• Link between consumer regulation and governance
• Regulating local authorities’ compliance with the consumer standards
• Compliance with electrical safety requirements
• Compliance with fire safety requirements
• Compliance with fire, electrical and asbestos safety requirements
• Supporting tenants experiencing anti-social behaviour
• Improving safety around communal areas
• Taking account of vulnerable tenants’ needs and
• Effective complaint handling.

Six lessons for providers from the 15 breaches were also outlined by the report:

(1) social landlords must ensure tenants are safe in their own homes, in terms of health and safety

(2) ensuring a respectful, fair treatment of tenants, to underpin a trustful mutual relationship

(3) a swift, effective process of responding to complaints,

(4) maintaining, and being able to evidence, compliance with consumer standards to all tenants and stakeholders, as well as a clear understanding of the requirements and responsibilities which providers are subject to

(5) good quality data management and effective systems

(6) a transparent relationship with the RSH, tenants and stakeholders, which may influence the level of regulatory intervention.

Fiona MacGregor, the Chief Executive of the RSH says “We expect housing associations and local authorities, including Boards and Councillors, to look carefully at this consumer regulation review and learn from the lessons we have identified”.

We are able to help providers ensure they are taking forward the outcomes of the review into their work, and you can contact us on 07867 974659 if you would like to enquire about this.

Prospect Board appointments

Last week the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) made three statutory appointments to the Board of Prospect Housing Limited. Prospect is a not-for-profit, lease-based provider of supported housing operating in Birmingham and the West Midlands. It provides accommodation to adults at risk of homelessness, often with complex needs, including a history of offending, substance misuse and mental health issues.

Making appointments to the Board of a Registered Provider (RP) is one of the options available to the RSH, where an RP is failing to comply with its Standards.  It is an option which the RSH might use when it believes that the RP’s current Board does not have the capacity, expertise or experience needed to resolve the RP’s problems and return it to compliance.  In this instance, the new Board members at Prospect are Chan Kataria, Chief Executive of emh group, John Ghader, Chief Executive of Prima Group and Paul Dolan, Chief Executive of Accent Group.

In November 2019 the RSH placed Prospect on its Gradings Under Review list because of doubts over its compliance with both the governance and financial viability elements of its Governance and Financial Viability Standard.  Subsequently, in May 2020, the RSH published a Regulatory Judgement (RJ) with straplines of G3 for Governance and V3 for Financial Viability, citing concerns relating to:

• significant weaknesses in Prospect’s business planning framework
• inadequate risk management processes and internal controls and
• that the board had failed to manage its affairs with an appropriate degree of skill, diligence, effectiveness, prudence and foresight.

Prospect is just one of several RPs operating lease-based business models which have fallen foul of the RSH, with the RSH also finding the following RPs to be non-compliant with its Governance and Financial Viability Standard:

• Bespoke Supportive Tenancies Limited
• Encircle Housing Limited
• Expectations (UK) Limited
• First Priority Housing Association Limited
• Inclusion Community Interest Company
• Larch Housing Association Limited
• New Roots Limited
• Sustain (UK) Limited
• Trinity Housing Association Limited
• Westmoreland Supported Housing Limited

RJs and Regulatory Notices[1] (RNs) for those (and other) RPs can be found on the RSH’s website.

Whilst the factors underlying the RSH’s assessments will vary for individual RPs, there are some themes which may be present where the RSH finds that a lease-based RP is not complying with its Standards.  In April 2019, the RSH set out those themes in ‘Lease-based providers of specialised supported housing’, an addendum to its Sector Risk Profile 2018.  The main areas of concern for the RSH are:

• an over-reliance on a single funding model of long-term leases, where the payments the RP makes over the period of the lease increase periodically (often annually) linked to the inflation rate at the time
• low levels of working capital available to fall back on in difficult times
• inadequate risk management and contingency planning arrangements
• poor governance practices resulting in sub-optimal decisions being made and
• doubts over whether rent levels are being set appropriately.

If you are operating a lease-based model it is important that you:

• understand the terms, obligations and risks of your leases
• have assurance on the arrangements you have in place for managing the risks arising from operating a lease-based model
• ensure the governance practices you have in place meet the Regulator’s expectations
• validate the assumptions, including inflation rates and rent levels, you are using to reflect leasing arrangements in your financial forecasts
• understand the impact if actual financial performance is worse than forecast and
• have plans in place to cope with any under-performance.

If we can help you with any of that, please give us a call on 07867 974659.

Note: The RSH publishes Regulatory Judgements for those RPs with more than 1,000 homes. 

Where an RP which the RSH deems to be non-compliant with its Governance and Financial Viability Standard has less than 1,000 homes, it publishes its judgement in a Regulatory Notice.

Here is a helpful guide to support tenants:

Supporting-people-with-mental-health-problems

Thanks to the CIH, this report will help tenants and communities to support eachother.

This follows the previous guide on supporting staff:

Shine a Light guide

There are a number of challenges, most notably including the replacement of heating systems run on gas and current fuels.

This will be expensive for landlords as many of these heating systems will not be at the end of their life when legislation comes in.

This is exacerbated by the the low availability of alternatives and for those that do exist – their expense and lack of testing.

Here is a useful guide to wheat we all need to know from Orbit and CIH:

Warm homes and a safe environment