Hyde Housing Association Limited — case 202420187

REPORT COMPLAINT 202420187 Hyde Housing Association Limited 10 September 2025 Our approach What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. We must determine whether a complaint falls within our jurisdiction. We seek to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this. In deciding whether a complaint falls within our jurisdiction, we will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint This complaint is about estate management charges for the resident’s property, and the member landlord’s communication about those charges. Determination (jurisdictional decision) When someone brings a complaint to us, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why we will not investigate a complaint. After carefully considering all the evidence, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within our jurisdiction.

Background The resident was the freehold owner of a house within an estate development. The estate is managed by a member of the Scheme, who we will refer to as ‘the member landlord’. The resident paid a set percentage of the member landlord’s costs through an estate management charge. The resident made a complaint about the estate management charge on 23 May 2024. She was unhappy with a charge that had been added in November 2023. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 20 June 2024 and a stage 2 response on 25 September 2024.

It accepted its communication around the charges had caused confusion, so offered a partial refund of the disputed charges. The resident was unhappy with the member landlord’s response, so referred her complaint to us. Reasons Paragraph 25 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme sets out who may refer a complaint to us. This includes those who have a landlord/tenant relationship with a member landlord, such as those who have a lease, tenancy, licence to occupy, service agreement or other arrangement to occupy premises owned or managed by a member.

Paragraph 41(a) of the Scheme says that we cannot consider complaints which, in our opinion, were not referred to us by one of the people who can use the Scheme under paragraph 25. We initially understood that the resident was a leaseholder of the property when the case was referred for investigation. The case was accepted on the basis that there was a landlord/tenant relationship between the resident and the member landlord. As part of the investigation, the resident told us she was the freehold owner of the property, not a leaseholder.

As the resident is a freehold owner of the property, there is no arrangement or contract (such as a lease or tenancy) to occupy a property owned by the member landlord. The property was owned by the resident. In the absence of a landlord/tenant relationship, we do not have the power to look into the resident’s complaint. This means we cannot investigate it. We appreciate this will be disappointing for the resident but, as set out above, we can only investigate complaints which fall within our jurisdiction.