Hightown Housing Association Limited — case 202343764

Decision Case ID 202343764 Decision type Investigation Landlord Hightown Housing Association Limited Landlord type Housing Association Occupancy Assured Tenancy Date 21 April 2026 Background The resident moved out of the property in November 2021 and asked the landlord to remove her name from the joint tenancy. When it did not do so, she raised a complaint. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of: The resident’s request to remove her name from the joint tenancy.

The complaint. Our decision (determination) We have found no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of: The resident’s request to remove her name from the joint tenancy. The complaint. We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons The landlord acted in line with the tenancy agreement and its procedure when handling the resident’s request to remove their name from the joint tenancy. The landlord acted in line with its policies in its handling of the complaint.

Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened 25 January 2024 The resident raised a complaint. She said she was unhappy that she remained named as a joint tenant. She asked the landlord to remove her name from the tenancy and to stop sending her notifications about enforcement action it had taken. 01 February 2024 The landlord responded at stage 1. It explained that the resident had requested the removal of her name from the tenancy on 2 November 2021, as she was no longer living at the property.

However, it said it had repeatedly advised her to seek legal advice because she remained jointly liable for the tenancy. The landlord stated that it could only remove her name if it received a court order instructing it to do so, and no such order had been provided. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and asked to escalate her complaint the same day. She wanted the landlord to review its decision, as she was no longer living in the property and wanted her name to be removed from the tenancy.

28 February 2024 The landlord responded at stage 2 and said: It had advised the resident on several occasions that, despite no longer living in the property, she remained jointly liable for the tenancy, including responsibility for rent payments. It was required to continue communicating with her about the rent arrears because she was a joint tenant with a legal interest in the property. It was unable to remove her name from the tenancy agreement while rent arrears were outstanding on the account, unless it received a court order instructing it to do so.

As the rent account remained in arrears it was unable to remove her name from the tenancy. Referral to the Ombudsman The resident brought her complaint to us as she was unhappy that her name had not been removed from the tenancy. She wanted her name to be removed as she had not lived in the property since 2021. What we found and why The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed.

We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration. Complaint The resident’s request to remove her name from the joint tenancy Finding No maladministration The landlord’s tenancy changes procedure states that to change a joint tenancy to a sole tenancy the rent account must be clear, unless a court order is granted. This aligned with the resident’s tenancy agreement. The resident told the landlord in November 2021 that she had moved out of the property and asked for her name to be removed from the joint tenancy.

The landlord advised her that her name could not be removed while there were arrears on the account, and that she remained liable for both ongoing rent and arrears. The evidence confirmed there were arrears on the account at the time. This was an appropriate response from the landlord and in line with its tenancy changes procedure. The landlord continued to notify the resident of rent arrears throughout December 2021, 2022, and 2023. The evidence showed that it provided appropriate guidance, including suggesting mediation and advising her to seek independent legal advice.

It consistently reiteratedthat her name could not be removed while there were arrears on the tenancy. This was reasonable and in line with itsprocedure. In both its stage 1 and stage 2 responses, the landlord said it could not remove the resident’s name from the tenancy while rent arrears remained, unless a court order was obtained. It also clearly outlined its legal position and explained why it was required to continue corresponding with the resident regarding the enforcement action being taken on the tenancy.

This further demonstrated clear communication about the circumstances and the landlord’s position. Overall, the landlord handled the resident’srequest to remove her name from the joint tenancy in line with the tenancy agreement and its procedure. It gave accurate and consistent advice to her throughout the process. Complaint The handling of the complaint Finding No maladministration The landlord had a 2-stage complaint process. It aimed to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days, issue a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1, and within 20 working days at stage 2.

Its definition of a complaint and its response timescales were compliant with the Complaint Handling Code. The landlord responded at both stages in line with its complaints policy. Its responses were clear and set out its position in response to the resident’s complaint. Learning Knowledge information management (record keeping) The landlord provided sufficient records to assist with the investigation of this complaint. Communication The landlord’s communication was consistent throughout the process.

It showed that it responded appropriately and promptly.