Summary
C complained about the way a member of the housing association's staff communicated with them and their partner about storing refuse bins at the rear of their property. Taking account of the evidence, overall, we did not consider that there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the association acted unreasonably in this regard. However, we considered that subsequent correspondence with C could have been more helpful and the situation handled better. We also noted some good practice by the association and that ultimately the situation regarding the storage of the bins was resolved. Therefore, we did not uphold this complaint.
C also complained that the association did not respond reasonably to their complaint. During our investigation, the association acknowledged that the complaint was not handled in line with their complaint handling procedure (the CHP). We agreed that this was the case because the timeframe for response was not met; C was not kept updated; the complaint was not handled according to the CHP; and the response lacked objectivity and impartiality. Overall, we considered that the association's handling of the complaint was unreasonable. Therefore, we upheld this complaint.
Recommendations
What we asked the organisation to do in this case: Apologise to C for the failings in their handling of the complaint. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at www.spso.org.uk/information-leaflets.
We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201800176 as a PDF (25.47 KB) Updated: June 17, 2020