All Case Studies

Safeguarding, support and rent arrears (June 2025)

Summary

Ms E was a tenant at Property A from 2014 until 2 June 2024, paying monthly by direct debit. Upon termination of the account, there were arrears of over £1000. She hoped to move to Property B in March 2024, but it was not ready due to damp, so she moved on May 2024. There was an overlap of tenancies for both properties between 20 May and 2 June 2024. The landlord credited her 2 weeks’ rent for Property A, reducing the arrears she owed, which was deducted from the home loss payment. The first direct debit for Property B was taken in June 2024, including an additional payment to offset the arrears. As of 24 February 2025, the resident’s rent account was in credit.

On 1 August 2024, the resident complained about the lack of support and professionalism from the safeguarding and housing teams, and the accuracy of her rent account/arrears. Our stage 1 response on 19 August 2024 acknowledged communication issues and offered £200 compensation. The resident escalated the complaint on 21 September 2024, and the landlord arranged a panel meeting for 4 November 2024. In the stage 2 response on 5 November 2024, the landlord corrected its previous statement about arrears and explained the payment arrangement. The landlord concluded that there was no unprofessionalism but kept the £200 compensation offer open

The Ombudsman found that:

1. we had taken a proactive approach and responded within our timescales, each time the resident reported she needed help. This included multiple contacts, meetings and visits.
2. When the resident further requested help, we arranged a meeting with her to help her complete the medical form.
3. We took her needs into account when making our decision to delay her move to property B as the property required repairs to be carried out.
4. When the resident reported she struggled with 5 or 6 different staff contacting her, we acknowledged that we could have been clearer why different teams were contacting her, offered £200 compensation for the poor communication and offered a point of contact for her.
5. We had correctly applied a 2 weeks credit onto her rent account, and that the payment plan arranged to cover the arrears from property A was cleared in February 2024.
6. We had corrected and apologised for stating that the resident was not in arrears in our final stage 2 response.

The Ombudsman found that there was no maladministration.

7. That we had taken a proactive approach when we noted the resident might need support
8. that we acted quickly when contacted by the resident
9. that we took the residents’ concerns onboard
10. that although we had taken positive steps throughout, we could have been clearer why she might be contacted by several people.
11. that we had offered reasonable redress.
12. that although we had as part of our stage 1 response that the resident did not have rent arrears, we corrected this statement with our stage 2 response.

Determination

• Reasonable redress by us in our handling of the resident’s concerns about the safeguarding team.
• No maladministration in relation to the handling of the resident’s rent arrears.

Recommendation

• To pay the initial £200 compensation we offered at stage 1 if we had not paid it already.