There is a real challenge to extend our private sector membership to convince private sector landlords and managing agents that we can provide a service and add value to the way that they deliver their products and services. Some quite major players in the private sector have realised this and have joined the scheme voluntarily. They have seen the value to their customers of having an independent reviewer of complaints. To be able to say “we want to provide you with a service and as a manifestation of that we have paid to join the Ombudsman’s service so that you can complain to it if you do not like what we do because we are committed to improving our service to you”.
The types of private landlords that have joined the scheme are in the vanguard of consumer awareness as they understand that the Ombudsman is a valuable addition to their service and can have a positive effect on their bottom line. If you are efficiently sustaining your relationship with your tenant or leaseholder and avoiding problems, you are more likely to sustain your revenue stream. One of the things the Ombudsman can do is help an agent sustain their relationship with its consumer.

The Housing Ombudsman has great independence; it is a statutory office, created by the Housing Act, with parliamentary provenance. The appointment is approved by the Secretary of State. This provides authority and a certain gravitas.

One of the most important things for the future is to revise the scheme so that Managing Agents can join. I have not encountered any government or stakeholder resistance to this.
I would also like to have a role in adjudicating tenancy deposit schemes in the private sector. Now all the bidders have put in their best and final offers and we are What do you see as the greatest challenges affecting you in this role?

There is a real challenge to extend our private sector membership to convince private sector landlords and managing agents that we can provide a service and add value to the way that they deliver their products and services. Some quite major players in the private sector have realised this and have joined the scheme voluntarily. They have seen the value to their customers of having an independent reviewer of complaints. To be able to say “we want to provide you with a service and as a manifestation of that we have paid to join the Ombudsman’s service so that you can complain to it if you do not like what we do because we are committed to improving our service to you”.

The types of private landlords that have joined the scheme are in the vanguard of consumer awareness as they understand that the Ombudsman is a valuable addition to their service and can have a positive effect on their bottom line. If you are efficiently sustaining your relationship with your tenant or leaseholder and avoiding problems, you are more likely to sustain your revenue stream. One of the things the Ombudsman can do is help an agent sustain their relationship with its consumer.

The Housing Ombudsman has great independence; it is a statutory office, created by the Housing Act, with parliamentary provenance. The appointment is approved by the Secretary of State. This provides authority and a certain gravitas.

One of the most important things for the future is to revise the scheme so that Managing Agents can join. I have not encountered any government or stakeholder resistance to this.
I would also like to have a role in adjudicating tenancy deposit schemes in the private sector. Now all the bidders have put in their best and final offers and we are waiting for the government to say who will be the providers of tenancy deposit schemes. It is no secret that I strongly believe there should be just one adjudicator, and the proposal for three separate providers is not in the interests of consumers.

We can add value to the sector by pointing out and promoting good practice and identifying and weeding out bad practice.

I should very much like to provide the adjudication service for commonhold as the Commonhold Ombudsman for which appointment officials at the Department for Constitutional Affairs have described me as “the Lord Chancellor’s ombudsman of choice”. We received a grant from the Department for exploratory work and drafted and submitted a Commonhold Ombudsman Scheme. It would be very exciting if more developers and lenders saw the benefits of commonhold schemes but it is very clear from experience of “strata title” across the world that effective dispute resolution will be imperative.

How are you planning to increase your membership?

In terms of the social sector, that will be a natural process through the large-scale voluntary transfers. That is a political process. In the private sector, we take every opportunity to network, speak at conferences, meet landlords and agents and so on, to explain the advantages of membership of the Ombudsman scheme.

What is the Ombudsman’s USP?

The moral value of our process and position. Particularly in the private sector, we also act in a dimension of self-regulation, and we are good for business in that through us landlords can sustain a relationship with their tenants to secure, among other things, rental income.

Independent research carried out on behalf of the housing corporation and myself concluded that dealing with complaints properly and having a medium of escalated, independent, authoritative complaint management, is valued by consumers, and gives valuable feedback to enable providers to provide the right service.

What are the sorts of complaints that the Service typically handles?

Over the years the most common thing people have complained about is disrepair. Also high on the list has been nuisance, annoyance, anti social behaviour and allocations, in other words, applicants to be housed may be unhappy about the way applications are dealt with. But this year for the first time our greatest incidence of complaint was about the way that complaints were handled. That’s the first time since 1997 that disrepair has been toppled from the top spot. This shows that what people want is to be treated courteously and with respect. I think this has been a really interesting change. Also for the first time this year more people have contacted us through the internet and the web than ever before.

There aren’t that many complaints against private sector landlords – chances are because they are professional outfits that know their business. I think the social and private sectors can learn from each other. In that my Scheme covers both the social and the private sectors, I am a “domain” ombudsman. If we had a domain regulator we could have a much better mechanism for cross fertilisation of good practice as they both have a lot to learn from each other, as they face many of the same issues. Leasehold is different as you get lots of complaints about service charges, and issues around right to buy and so on. There are good landlords and bad landlords and good tenants and bad tenants in both sectors.

What was your most amusing case?

“The tenant upstairs is keeping geese in the bath, can you send someone round to have a gander?”
 

…and your most moving case?

An elderly woman had complained to me about the closure of the retirement home in which she was a resident. My team did a lot of work looking into the circumstances of what was a complicated legal and practical situation. The complainant was a very determined woman who fought long and hard on behalf not only of herself but also of the other residents who were mostly in their eighties. Eventually we criticised the landlord and they acknowledged that they should have handled things better. The home was saved and the residents allowed to remain with an improved level of support services. Sadly, however, the complainant died soon after the completion of the case and so did not live to see the benefits from her efforts.
 

How many complaints do you handle each year?

In 2006, there was a 13% increase in complaints, to over 5,200. And a 32% increase in the number of complaints requiring investigation (556). Of the remainder some were not in our jurisdiction, being local authority or a non-member private landlords, but we still gave advice to the complainants as where else they could go for help. Others were dealt with in an informal way – through conciliation. I am lucky in that my Scheme provides me with the discretion to create different ways of dealing with disputes. One of my caseworkers might hear from a complainant, then ring the landlord who will sort out the problem straight away. We generally describe this process as “conciliation” and I don’t think we do enough at the moment to publicise that success. We also use mediation, and if that fails, we usually allocate a case to investigation.
Cases tend to fall into the ends of a spectrum – they tend either to be dealt with quite quickly or are complex. The latter do not often lend themselves to adjudication with a hearing so they are more likely to be determined by investigation.

Why would someone use the Ombudsman Service rather than an LVT?

If the Ombudsman makes a decision and one party does not hold to it, what happens?

It depends on the nature of the complaint. For instance we have recently received cases about service charges that need a definite decision – we will refer those to the Tribunal. I have the power to say that a complaint is better dealt with elsewhere. If there are other issues relating to the relationship between landlord and tenant which are more related to management, then the ability to be able to go to the Ombudsman without having to use lawyers and a formal hearing, is a better fit for the parties and a more flexible means of dispute resolution.


Landlords that join the scheme are expected to comply with my decisions. In the social sector, if they don’t comply, I will ask the Housing Corporation to take action against them. This happened once, twice at most, last year.

Complainants have the right to go to court to appeal. Since the Woolf reforms, the courts expect people to have used an alternative dispute resolution process if one is available, and are likely to say “you have had your case determined by an independent process and bringing it to us does not disclose any new case to answer”. To my knowledge it does not happen very often and no tenant has succeeded in the court at turning around my decision. Unless there is something glaring that we have missed, there is no reason to reopen a case.

Only 25% of cases last year resulted in maladministration findings. There is no regulator in the private sector, so all that can be done is to expel the landlord from the Scheme, which is not ideal. Or I can publicly ‘name and shame’. I can’t even remember the last time this was done.

Even if some people do not like my decision, they understand that it has been through a proper process and are content to comply. I feel this is because we have done a lot of work on networking with stakeholders about our philosophy, quality control, and the way we communicate, it is now more widely recognised that if I say this is what we have found, then this is what we have found.

The Ombudsman’s decision is final. So before the final determination is issued, a preliminary determination is sent out giving parties advance notice of our conclusions. We say that if you have any new evidence at this point, please let us know. Sometimes they do and it makes no difference, sometimes it will effect a change.

What do you see as the biggest ‘growth’ areas for disputes brought to you in the future?

It may be a boring answer, but looking at the trend over the last 10 years, I don’t think we can expect to see a great change. Disrepair, nuisance, allocation. And yet suddenly, a different subject hits the top spot – something that was a surprise! It is an interesting social phenomenon that may indicate greater consumer awareness. Nevertheless, our experience indicates that the fabric of their homes and the environment in which they are situated are the key issues for most people.
 

What achievements are you most proud of?

I am proud of that fact that we have met our targets and in some cases exceeded them. I am proud of the fact that we have increased our presence in the private sector. I am proud of the fact that I hear from various sources that our reputation has grown in terms of the quality of what we do and I am certainly proud of the immense work all my team has done in terms of ensuring that we provide an efficient, fair process.

Additionally, I am proud of the positive feedback that we have received about the work we have been doing by way of complaint prevention and training. This is a proactive contribution that adds value to both landlords and tenants.

Tell us a little about your non-professional interests?

I still like to surf, and I swim a couple of times a week. I used to play hockey and I am going to start playing again this autumn, having missed two seasons. I also like to read, listen to music, and spend time with my family – although I hasten to add that this is not a euphemism for imminent retirement!