Review Time
Waited 2 years for an abysmally shocking report.
waited two years for an investigation report relating to two complaints ,
I sent an email to the HO 18 months ago asking for confirmation that both my complaints were going to be dealt with, The Ho investigator has failed to investigate the complaints made, has shown bias and a lack of impartiality in favour of my landlord.
In relation to the 2nd complaint has stated that they can not investigate unless the landlord has the chance to " make things right " and has now closed the complaint, odd as the HO guidance states the HO will engage with both parties to find an amicable solution and will only close the complaint if the Landlord's resolution is agreed to by both parties.
I have informed them due to my landlords conduct i will not be agreeing to any proposals put forward by the Landlord and would like them to address the complaint and multiple failures of my landlord to follow any stipulated HO guidance.
I have already experienced a string of untrue statements made by the investigating case officer provided via her team manager in the form of very derogatory condescending emails.
Having already been through the HO process several times, it's clear this organisation is broken and unfit for purpose and needs to be investigated by an independent authority.
What seems to be a new HO approach is the Landlords opportunity to " make things right " at the expense of any thorough investigation clearly put in place to reduce waiting times; however, it detracts from any adequate redress the tenant has, as post investigation and the landlord being held to account " what a joke that is " the Landlord would be required to " make things right " anyway,
It is never going to going to happen, however, the Government should reinstate the legal aid for qualifying housing cases so tenants can really hold their despicable landlords truly to account.
After waiting two years for a deeply unsatisfactory investigation report regarding two complaints, I reached out to the organization 18 months ago to confirm that both issues were being addressed. The investigator has shown bias and a lack of impartiality favoring my landlord, stating they cannot investigate the second complaint unless the landlord is given a chance to 'make things right,' leading to the closure of the case. This is perplexing, as the guidelines suggest that both parties should be engaged for a fair resolution. I've made it clear that due to my landlord's behavior, I refuse to agree to any proposals they offer and expect the organization to address the landlord's multiple failures to follow the stipulated guidelines. I've encountered numerous false statements from the case officer, conveyed through condescending emails from their management. Having gone through this process multiple times, it's evident that the organization is flawed and unfit for its purpose, requiring oversight from an independent authority. Their new approach seems to prioritize landlords' chances to 'make things right' over thorough investigations, ultimately undermining tenants' rights. It is unlikely that any real accountability will occur, and I believe the government should reinstate legal aid for housing cases to empower tenants against irresponsible landlords.
This is my third complaint to the organization since 2021 regarding the staff of my landlord's housing association. Following an initial complaint against newly appointed senior management, I have faced a barrage of false allegations and baseless eviction threats from the same staff making these claims. Complaints directed at them are ignored, and despite providing video evidence and independent witness statements, these are overlooked because the same individuals are involved in both the allegations and the complaints. I would welcome any legal action initiated by the landlord, as it would allow me to obtain legal aid, provided I can find a solicitor available to assist. However, the landlord has declined to take any legal action, likely due to the evidence I possess. I have sought help from my local council, which stated they lack the authority to intervene, and my local MP, who was misled by the landlord. Despite supplying further evidence to the MP's team, they informed me they could no longer assist. Attempts to gain help through the government’s legal advice line have been fruitless, as they claim it falls outside their remit or that I've already discussed this. Their assistance is minimal, typically providing solicitor contacts that either do not return calls or cannot accommodate my case. I initially approached the housing ombudsman with hopes for resolution, but after three complaints and substantial evidence showing the allegations and eviction threats are unfounded, the ombudsman has repeatedly failed to acknowledge this evidence in their reports. Complaints to the ombudsman’s complaints team about their non-compliance with investigation guidelines have been met with the assertion that they are following protocol, despite clear evidence being omitted from their reports. The ombudsman’s failure to address these issues has likely emboldened the landlord's staff to continue their harassment. My experience illustrates a significant disregard for evidence and a lack of competent complaint resolution, and while no organization is perfect, it is evident from various tenant accounts that the ombudsman is consistently failing those they are meant to assist. Many may feel defeated after being let down by the process, but I plan to approach my local MP again, armed with the evidence of the ombudsman’s continued failures.
The service appears biased, similar to other ombudsman services, failing to represent complainants adequately. While the investigators are polite, they seem two-faced, presenting a friendly demeanor while neglecting the issues at hand. Many others share this sentiment, as reflected in the reviews.
As anticipated, the Housing Ombudsman Service acts as a form of 'controlled opposition.' They tend to dismiss significant portions of complaints against landlords and selectively acknowledge parts of the issues raised. In my situation, they claimed that the property's condition was outside their jurisdiction. They touched on some anti-social behavior from neighbors but defended the landlord despite overwhelming evidence of breaches of tenancy and law. If you've consulted a legal representative before contacting the ombudsman, they will likely refuse to review your complaint. The ombudsman seems designed to protect negligent landlords, discouraging tenants from pursuing legal action. Be prepared for frustration with the system, but continue to document everything for the tribunal, which is not biased against corrupt landlords. After your tribunal, you can take further action against your landlord. Ensure you have clear proof that you've followed all procedures and given your landlord every chance to rectify the situation. When the system fails to hold them accountable, it can provide you with powerful evidence for your case.
I strongly advise against using this service. They lack understanding of their responsibilities. It's more effective to consult a solicitor. Rogue landlords thrive because of the ombudsman’s protection, allowing them to act without accountability. Evidence may be abundant, but you cannot submit it, while the landlords have a platform to share as much as they want. This organization seems more concerned with their own procedures than with justice.
While Awaab's Law has made strides in protecting tenants from black mould, my experience with the ombudsman and local council reveals a troubling lack of accountability. I reported a serious mould issue affecting a family, yet the council failed to respond effectively. The ombudsman concluded that the compensation offered was 'fair,' despite evident delays and distress caused. Their final response indicated no review would occur due to 'no new facts,' ignoring the substantial evidence of harm. I've since learned that other tenants in the same building are facing similar issues. My appeal was dismissed without consideration of legal arguments. This situation highlights a concerning reality: even with laws like Awaab's in place, families can still suffer when oversight bodies fail to enforce accountability. The ombudsman seemed more focused on procedural adherence than on genuine accountability. Their suggestion to 'seek legal help' was dismissive and unhelpful. Without proper enforcement, these laws are ineffective. I hope sharing this encourages others to advocate for safe housing and emphasizes the need for real accountability.
This process is ineffective. Please do not waste your time. If you have a serious issue, seek a competent solicitor instead. The organization appears to favor landlords, likely due to their financial contributions, and this corruption warrants serious investigation.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
We resolve disputes and support effective landlord-tenant dispute resolution by others. Our service is free to tenants, independent and impartial.
