The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: The complainant (Miss X) said the Council’s failings during a garage rental agreement between her and the Council caused her financial loss and distress. She also complained about the Council officer’s conduct during a telephone conversation. We find fault with the way the Council handled Miss X’s garage rental and interacted with her during the complaint handling. These faults caused her injustice. The Council agreed with our recommendations for personal remedies and to provide training to the staff.
The complaint
Miss X complains about the Council ending her garage rental agreement despite her making all the rent payments on time. She also complains about the Council disposing of her possessions kept in the garage. She says she paid two months of rent for the time when she had no access to the garage as she was unaware of the escalating correspondence sent by the Council. This was very distressing for her.
Miss X says when she contacted the Council to discuss her complaint, the Council officer was rude to her and left her in tears.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I spoke with Miss X and considered the information she provided.
I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.
What I found
Legal and administrative background Councils may serve any notice, order or other document by delivering it to the person, by leaving it at the person’s proper address or by sending it by post to the proper address. The proper address is the person’s last known address. (Local Government Act 1972 S.233 (2) and (4)) When providing its services to people councils should be service-user focused, which include: Dealing with people helpfully, promptly and sensitively, taking account of their individual circumstances; Responding to service users’ needs flexibly and, where appropriate, coordinating a response with other service providers; Recognising and respecting the diversity of service users and adopting an inclusive approach. (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman “Principles of good administrative practice” December 2018) What happened In the third week of January 2021 Miss X signed an agreement with the Council to rent a garage.
In the first week of February 2021 Miss X set up a standing order to the Council’s account for £95. The payments were set up for 21st of each month. Miss X cancelled the standing order on 21 October 2021, not in time to stop the advanced payment for November 2021. The payments were made monthly from February till October.
From February 2021 Miss X started receiving arrears reminder letters. In February she discussed this matter with the Council’s officer and emailed a proof of payment for renting the garage.
After receiving a second arrears reminder letter in the beginning of March 2021, Miss X again provided the Council officer with the proof of payment and discussed the matter with him. She asked whether she should cancel the standing order and use a different method of payment instead. She was re-assured she should continue with her payments by standing order.
In mid-April 2021 the Council discovered Miss X’s payments were credited to the Council’s suspense account, one of them later transferred to Miss X’s house rent account. Later the Council transferred both payments to the garage rental account.
After receiving a third arrears reminder letter in June 2021 Miss X again sent to the Council her proof of payment and called to clarify the reasons for this correspondence. The Council located two further payments in its suspense account and transferred them into Miss X's garage rental account.
The Council sent Miss X three further arrears reminder letters in July and August 2021, followed by a Notice to Quit and another arears reminder letter in the beginning of September 2021.
In accordance with the Notice to Quit in the third week of September 2021 the Council repossessed the garage. The locks were changed and Miss X’s goods removed. The Council also served Miss X with the notice she should collect her possessions by a certain date in October, otherwise her items would be disposed of.
As Miss X failed to collect her goods by the specified date, the Council disposed of them. They included a wooden garden bench, tins of paint and various objects which the Council described in the inventory as “rubbish”.
Later in October Miss X contacted the Council as she could not access the garage rented by her. During the correspondence which followed, Miss X provided proofs of all her payments. She also explained she did not received any Council’s letters or notices sent between July 2021 and September 2021.
Having found out the Council disposed of her possessions, Miss X asked for a refund for October and November rental payments as well as return of her goods.
Stage 1 complaint In October, after becoming aware the Council ended the garage rental agreement and repossessed it, Miss X sent her Stage 1 complaint.
In its response the Council explained it sent regular arears reminder letters to Miss X. It said in April and June 2021 the Council’s officer located Miss X’s payments and arranged for them to be credited to the garage account.
From July 2021 to September 2021 the Council sent further arrears reminder letters and notices, to which Miss X did not reply. The Council said it followed the right process which eventually led to repossession and disposal of Miss X’s goods kept in the garage.
The Council refused to reinstate the garage or offer compensation. It undertook to take off Miss X’s account the cost of lock replacement of £160 and clearance charge of £43.
Telephone call Confused by the Council’s Stage 1 response and anxious to get the matter resolved, in mid-December 2021 Miss X called the Council.
I have read the Council’s transcript of this call. During just under 15-minutes long conversation the Council’s officer became increasingly impatient and harsh. He was unreceptive to Miss X’s statements and failed to give Miss X a satisfactory advice on the options available to her. His manner increased Miss X’s upset and at the end of the conversation she was left in tears.
Stage 2 complaint In its Stage 2 response the Council accepted Miss X made all the rental payments and did not owe any outstanding amount when the garage was repossessed.
The Council inferred Miss X’s must have used a wrong reference number which meant that her payments were not credited to the right account. This resulted in her being in breach of her contractual obligation to make payments on time.
The Council recognised Miss X tried to rectify the matters in March 2021 and the Council could have done more to advise her of the incorrect reference number used on the standing order. The Council also should have carried out further investigation during the repossession proceedings.
When upholding Miss X’s complaint, the Council offered her compensation of £250 as the maximum amount that can be awarded for time and trouble.
Analysis Fault The Council failed to properly address Miss X’s concerns about her rental payments in the first two months of her renting the garage. On two occasions after receiving the arrears reminder letter from the Council, Miss X called the garage team and told them of the standing order set up for these payments.
During her telephone conversation with the Council officer in March 2021 Miss X asked him whether she should cancel the standing order and pay differently but was re-assured this was the right way to pay.
The Council’s officer failed to find out the reasons for Miss X’s payments not coming through and failed to advise her what she should do to avoid further complications. Having transferred Miss X’s payments from the Council’s suspense account in April 2021 and then in June 2021 it is unclear why the Council failed to explore the reasons for these payments going to the wrong account to avoid this happening in the future. This is fault which caused Miss X’s injustice.
I cannot determine what happened with the Council’s correspondence to Miss X from July 2021 till September 2021. The Council provided me with the copies of the arrears reminder letters, a notice to quit, a repossession letter and Section 41 letter. They were all correctly addressed to Miss X.
Miss X said she never received this correspondence. Having considered all the evidence there is no reason to doubt Miss X’s statement. Since before July 2021 she had always reacted to the Council’s arrears reminder letters, it is unlikely she would have ignored the Council’s later escalating correspondence.
At the same time the law allows councils to deliver its notices, orders and letters by normal post, which should be addressed to the person’s most recent address. I do not, therefore, find fault in how the Council proceeded to end Miss X’s rental agreement and the garage repossession from July 2021 till October 2021, despite her not receiving the Council’s correspondence.
This finding, however, does not affect the overall conclusion that if the Council had acted without fault in the first months of Miss X’s rental agreement, the matter would have not escalated. Thus, Miss X would not have suffered injustice by being deprived of the use of the garage rented by her and by losing her possessions.
I find fault in the way the Council’s officer carried out his conversation with Miss X in mid-December 2021. Although some interactions between residents and the Council officers can be challenging by their very nature, the Council officers are expected to retain professional and dispassionate manner.
Injustice Lack of use of the garage – from the third week in September 2021 Miss X did not have use of garage for which she paid until the end of November 2021.
Disposal of Miss X’s possessions – Miss X lost all her goods kept in the garage.
Inappropriate language when Miss X’s possessions were called rubbish – the value of the material objects for their owner can sometimes differ from their market value. The fact Miss X was paying rent to store her possessions shows the objects kept in the garage were valuable to her. Therefore calling some of them rubbish is unacceptable.
Distress at bearing negative effects despite compliance with her part of the agreement – from Miss X’s perspective she complied with the rental agreement by paying in advance a monthly rent for the garage. She was aware of some problems at first with the payments but contacted the Council at the time and was convinced the problems had been resolved. Miss X acted in confidence to the Council’s officers and their advice.
Distress caused by the Council’s officer’s manner during the telephone conversation – the officer’s lack of empathy and impatience increased Miss X’s sense of being unfairly treated.
Remedies The Council offered time and trouble payment to Miss X of £250 and took off her account the cost of lock replacement and storage of her goods.
When deciding this time and trouble payment is not enough to remedy the injustice caused by the Council’s fault, I bear in mind we aim through our remedies to put the complainant back in the position they would have been in if nothing had gone wrong.
Agreed action
To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council within four weeks of the final decision complete the following: Apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused to her by the faults identified; Pay Ms X £190 to refund the rental payments for October and November 2021 when she had no use of the garage; Pay Ms X £300 for the loss of her goods kept in the garage; Pay Ms X £150 to recognise the distress caused to her by the faults identified.
We also recommend the Council within three months of the final decision train or re-train the staff dealing with complaints in the handling of difficult conversations. The Council will provide us with the copy of materials used for the training and the list of staff to whom the training was delivered.
Final decision
For the reasons explained in the Analysis section I uphold Miss X’s complaint and find fault in the way the Council handled Miss X’s garage rental and interacted with her during the complaint handling. These faults caused her injustice. The Council accepted my recommendations and this investigation is now complete.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman