Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Richmond Housing Partnership Limited (202325580)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325580

Richmond Housing Partnership Limited

31 January 2025


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to her shower.

Background

  1. The resident holds a 5-year assured shorthold tenancy, which began in September 2021. The landlord has confirmed to us that the resident has advised it that she has additional support needs around her mental health.
  2. The bathroom in the property has a bath, with a tap set that has an attachment for a shower hose. The resident first raised concerns that she could not get the shower to a comfortable temperature, with the water either being too hot or too cold, in October 2021.
  3. The landlord’s records show a repair was raised in relation to the shower in October 2021, and a further repair was raised in April 2022. The records show the landlord was invoiced for these repairs, indicating they were attended to by its contractor.
  4. The resident complained to the landlord in April 2022 about a missed appointment to repair the shower, and told it she had not been able to have a shower since she moved in. She told the landlord she did not think it had been supportive of her mental health needs when handling the matter. 
  5. In response to this complaint, the landlord agreed to book a new repair appointment, and offered the resident £100 compensation.
  6. The landlord’s records show a repair to the shower was raised in June 2022. Its records then show a gap until April 2023, when a further repair was raised for the shower. The records show the landlord was invoiced for these repairs, indicating they were attended to by its contractor.
  7. The resident contacted the landlord to report several repairs in June 2023, including the bathroom tap and shower. On 20 August 2023 the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s response to these repairs, and asked the landlord to log a stage 1 complaint.
  8. The landlord sent a stage 1 complaint acknowledgement to the resident on 29 August 2023, and it issued its stage 1 complaint response letter to her on 11 September 2023. On the matter of the shower, it said it had arranged a new repair appointment for 26 September 2023, and was “committed to resolving” the issue for the resident. It offered the resident a total of £100 compensation for the time it had taken to resolve the repairs, for the resident’s distress and inconvenience, and for its “lack” of communication.
  9. The resident contacted this Service at the end of September 2023, and explained that she was not confident that the landlord understood the underlying problem with the shower, or that it was taking appropriate steps to remedy it.
  10. The landlord subsequently logged a stage 2 complaint for the resident, including the various repairs she had raised at stage 1, and it issued a stage 2 complaint response to her on 23 October 2023. It offered the resident £250 compensation, made up of £100 for delayed email responses and a “poor service” from it, £50 for her time and trouble chasing the repairs, and £100 for “incorrectly booked” appointments and delay to completing the repairs. It told the resident it had changed its repairs contractor, which had impacted on the time taken to carry out the repairs, and it had also introduced a new “diagnostic tool” in its software, to improve its repairs delivery.
  11. The resident has explained to this Service that she believes the water pressure in the property is not sufficient to enable the water to mix to a comfortable temperature when using the shower. She has also advised us that it is especially important to her to be able to shower because she has physical health conditions including arthritis and a condition affecting her knee, making a bath ‘unviable’ as an alternative.

Assessment and findings

  1. This investigation is focussed on the matter of the shower, as the other repairs referenced in the resident’s stage 1 and 2 complaints were resolved through the landlord’s internal complaints process. We acknowledge that the landlord’s remedies included compensation for its overall handling of repairs in the property, not just the shower.
  2. The landlord has a responsibility to ensure that the resident had access to operational bathing facilities under the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985), and its repair obligations under the resident’s tenancy agreement.
  3. In this case, the resident had access to bathing facilities (the bath), but due to her physical health conditions she did not consider this a suitable alternative to showering.
  4. The records we have seen do not show that the landlord was aware of the resident’s physical health conditions, but equally they do not demonstrate that it was appropriately curious given the resident’s repeated request that it ensure that she was able to shower.
  5. The landlord was aware that the resident raised her mental health in her first complaint in 2022. Despite confirming to us that it was aware the resident was vulnerable due to her mental health, the landlord has not provided evidence that it carried out any impact or risk assessment to understand whether there were any reasons it should prioritise the repair to the shower. 
  6. It would now be appropriate for the landlord to contact the resident to take details of her health conditions, and we recommend that it refer her to the local occupational therapy service. This would enable an assessment of her needs to be completed, and for any recommendations regarding adaptations to be made.
  7. Given the length of time that has elapsed since the matter was first reported in October 2021, we encourage the landlord to consider whether it could remedy the situation by installing a separate shower system, to enable the resident to bathe comfortably. This may, for example, include consideration of an electrically assisted shower unit, if this would be easier to install.
  8. We recognise that such works would be an improvement, rather than a repair, which means that there is not a legal obligation for the landlord to do them. It is our opinion that it would be reasonable, and a positive step to improve the situation, for the landlord to consider exercising its discretion while exploring potential options to resolve the matter for the long-term.
  9. We have commented on the landlord’s communication in its complaint response letters, in several recent cases. In this case, the landlord’s stage 2 complaint letter was not sufficiently specific to convey genuine engagement with the matters the resident raised, or to reassure her that the landlord fully understood and had taken appropriate steps to remedy them.
  10. Additionally, while we assume the offer of compensation made at stage 2 was in addition to its offer at stage 1 (making a total of £350), the landlord did not make this clear in its letter.
  11. If the offer was intended to be £350, this would take the total compensation offered over the years covered by this report to £450. The landlord should ensure this amount has been paid to the resident, and it should make a further offer to address the failings we have identified in this report (as set out in the orders section below).
  12. We note that the resident has told us that she was contacted by the landlord to discuss  “disrepair” once her complaint was with us, and that progress and contact from the landlord regarding the shower stalled after this. We note that we have not seen evidence to directly confirm this.
  13. In November 2021, we published guidance for landlords regarding cases where they have received disrepair claims, which can be read here: https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/2021/11/03/new-guidance-for-landlords-on-disrepair-claims/ . In the guidance, we encourage landlords not to disengage from either their internal complaint process or the repairs issues that have been raised once a disrepair claim has been logged.
  14. While there was not a disrepair legal claim in this case, we feel this guidance is relevant to the resident’s described experience, and encourage the landlord to ensure it is familiar with our position on disrepair and complaint resolution, and that its staff are aware of the need to remain focussed on the resolution of complaints when they have been brought to this Service.
  15. In summary, while the landlord has arranged for several responsive repairs to be carried out to the shower, the underlying problem was not remedied. It made a commitment to the resident that it would take steps to ensure she had a usable shower. The landlord does not appear to have been aware of why the matter was so important to the resident, and this demonstrates a failing on its part to explore the resident’s needs, or to consider other options such as an OT referral or improvement. The end result of its failure to do this has caused the resident uncertainty and inconvenience for over 3 years.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s shower.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must ensure it has directly paid the resident a total of £550, made up of:
    1. £450 compensation offered in its complaint responses referenced above;
    2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced due to the landlord’s failure to appropriately investigate and address the concerns she raised about her ability to shower.
  2. Within four weeks of the date of this report, an appropriately senior manager should send the resident a written apology for the landlord’s failure to appropriately investigate and address the concerns she raised about her ability to shower.
  3. Within eight weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should contact the resident to:
    1. Confirm it has recorded current details of any disabilities, long-term health conditions, or other vulnerabilities she has;
    2. Take steps to refer her to the local occupational therapy (OT) service, if appropriate;
    3. Confirm whether it will wait for an outcome of an OT assessment before making a decision about works to her shower, or whether it will proceed to identify a solution (for example, a further repair or installation of a separate shower system).
  4. The landlord must provide us with a copy of written communication to the resident to confirm the details discussed in relation to the above order.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord confirm to the resident who will act as her point of contact regarding the matter of the shower, until a resolution is confirmed and completed.
  2. The resident has advised us that repairs are needed to a light and a sink. We recommend the designated staff member contacts the resident to confirm details of all current repairs she would like to report, and confirms to her in writing when these have been logged, with timescales for the repairs to be completed.
  3. We recommend the landlord should consider how it can ensure information relating to disabilities and other vulnerabilities is appropriately captured in future cases, with particular attention to how it captures information relating to repairs that have been raised more than once.
  4. We encourage the landlord to consider whether it could offer training to its staff in response to matters highlighted in this and other recent investigations, in relation to its communication in complaint response letters.