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

Orwell Housing Association Limited (202335784)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202335784

Orwell Housing Association Limited

27 March 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 complaint is about the:
    1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows.
    2. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the shed roof.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s record keeping.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant. The property is a house. The property had a brick built shed in the garden.
  2. The landlord had no vulnerabilities recorded for the household at the time of the complaint. The resident told the landlord during the complaint process, that both she and her children had disabilities. However, the resident did not elaborate on the nature of those disabilities.
  3. The resident raised the stage 1 complaint on 1 March 2023, after the landlord missed a prearranged appointment to repair the windows. The resident added on 7 March 2023, that she had not yet had a date for repairing the shed roof.
  4. The landlord issued the stage 1 complaint response on 14 March 2023. The landlord said it would make arrangements to “putty” the living-room window and reassess the roof on the shed.
  5. The landlord issued a concluding stage 1 response on 26 April 2023. The landlord did not find any failings in relation to its handling of window repairs. It said follow on works had been required, as the repairs were not simple day to day repairs. It added that any repairs identified had been attended to already or had been booked in. But it agreed that there had been a delay inspecting the shed roof, for which it apologised and offered £50 compensation.
  6. The resident emailed the landlord on 26 April 2023. The resident said she wanted to escalate the complaint to stage 2, as she was not happy with the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response.
  7. The landlord issued the stage 2 complaint response on 16 May 2023. The landlord:
    1. Set out the action that it taken in response to the resident’s request for repairs to the shed roof and the windows. It apologised for the length of time it had taken to resolve these repairs.
    2. Committed to chasing repairs to the shed roof, until the point of completion.
    3. Said it had already scheduled repairs to the windows for 15 June 2023.
    4. Accepted that it had not made an offer of compensation in relation to increased heating costs, since this requested by the resident on 9 December 2022.
    5. Offered £250 compensation in recognition of the resident’s increased heating costs, which equated to £50 per month. And an additional £250 compensation, for failing to repair the shed roof in a timely manner.
  8. The resident brought her complaint to the us on 27 January 2024. The resident said she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s final complaint response. She said there were still unresolved issues with the windows. And the landlord should complete the window repairs in a timely manner, to a satisfactory standard.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. This investigation will focus on the landlord’s actions between 1 March 2022 and 16 May 2023. This being 12 months prior to the substantive complaint being made, through to when the landlord’s internal complaint procedure was exhausted.
  2. We are aware that the resident made a new complaint to the landlord in November 2023, about the landlord’s handling of “unresolved” issues with “windows”, which postdates the timeframe of this investigation.
  3. For clarity, events that happened after 16 May 2023, may be referenced but will not be assessed. However, if the resident remains dissatisfied with the outcome of the landlord’s later complaint investigation, she would be entitled to bring that complaint to the Ombudsman for our consideration.

The landlord’s obligations, policies, and procedures

  1. The landlord had a contractual and statutory obligation under the tenancy agreement and Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair.
  2. According to the landlord’s repairs policy, the landlord will complete emergency repairs in 6 hours and all other repairs in 21 calendar days.
  3. The landlord had an obligation under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, to keep the property free of hazards, which were so serious that the dwelling would not be suitable for occupation in that condition. Excess cold is considered a potential hazard under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). According to the HHSRS guidance, preventative measures might include, ensuring that windows are properly fitted.
  4. According to the landlord’s complaints policy, the landlord may offer compensation in line with its compensation policy and procedure. The landlord did not provide us with a copy of this policy and we were unable to obtain a copy from the landlord’s website. A recommendation is made later in respect of this.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows

  1. The resident first reported cold drafts coming through the living room window and the front and back bedroom windows on 9 December 2022. The landlord agreed to inspect the windows, which was positive given its obligation to minimise potential hazards arising in the property. The evidence shows that an inspection was arranged for 9 January 2023, which was 18 working days after the resident’s initial report. It would have been better for the landlord to have inspected the windows in a timelier manner. But there was no evidence to suggest that a more urgent inspection was required.
  2. The landlord inspected the windows on 9 January 2023, as it had committed. Its operative identified that the hinges on the lounge window needed replacing, which would be a 2-person job. An appointment was raised to complete this repair on 6 February 2023, which was within expected timescales under the landlord’s repairs policy.
  3. The landlord’s operatives attended the property on 6 February 2023, as it had committed. The job notes state that it eased and adjusted 7 windows, to “reduce / eliminate drafts”. It also fitted a new hinge on the living room window. The landlord then marked the job as completed, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  4. The resident asked the landlord to reinspect the windows sometime between 6 February 2023 and 13 February 2023, because she was unhappy with the repairs it had carried out.
  5. The resident and the landlord exchanged several emails on 13 February 2023. The resident said she was still experiencing drafts through the windows. She noted that the landlord had committed to reinspecting the windows on 1 March 2023. But suggested it should bring this inspection forward, given that both she and her children had disabilities. She explained that she had taped up the windows in the meantime to try and help stop the draft. She said the landlord should pay compensation for the length of time it was taking to carry out the window repairs. And reimburse her increased energy costs, arising from trying to keep the property warm.
  6. The landlord could have sought more information from the resident about the disabilities she had mentioned, given it had no vulnerabilities recorded for the household. It could then have taken this information into account, when deciding upon its next steps. But the landlord did email the resident the same day, explaining that it would try to move the window repairs forward if it could. This shows that it was trying to progress the repair for the resident in a timelier manner, which was encouraging.
  7. The landlord also committed to tracking any repairs that were identified, through to completion. This was best practice and is likely to have offered the resident some reassurance. It acted fairly, by offering to compensate the resident for any increased energy costs between 12 December 2022 and 12 February 2023, if she could provide a copy of her energy bill. The landlord said that it would honour any additional increased energy costs if it was unable to bring the window repair forward. This was positive and shows that it was taking into consideration the impact to the resident.
  8. The resident emailed the landlord on 1 March 2023, expressing concern that it had not kept its appointment to reinspect the windows. The landlord raised a task the same day, for a member of its staff to phone the resident about the missed appointment. However, there is no evidence that it phoned the resident, which was unreasonable and would have left her unclear of its intentions. The resident had to email the landlord on 7 March 2023 to ask for a new appointment date, which created added time and trouble for the resident. The resident stressed in her email, that the rooms were very cold, even with the heating on.
  9. According to the landlord’s internal communications on 13 March 2023, the landlord’s complaint handler was unable to identify any outstanding jobs on its repairs system. This was a concern and may suggest there was an issue with the landlord’s record keeping.
  10. It was positive that the landlord’s complaint handler contacted the resident on 14 March 2023, to clarify what jobs were outstanding if it was unsure. According to the stage 1 response, it was agreed between the parties, that it would raise a new job to putty the window in the living room. It was unclear how the landlord was able to determine what works were necessary without completing an inspection. But nevertheless, the landlord raised a works order promptly, the following day.
  11. The landlord’s operative attended in a timely manner on 23 March 2023, to re putty the living room window. However, upon inspection, identified that the living room window needed to be removed and realigned on its hinges. There was no suggestion that the windows presented a hazard to the resident or her household in their current state, which was reassuring. The evidence shows that the landlord raised an appointment to complete these works on 19 April 2023, which was outside of its expected timescale for completing repairs. It may have been reasonable for the landlord to have prioritised this job, given the length of time the resident had already waited for a resolution.
  12. The resident emailed the landlord on 17 April 2023, asking for compensation due to the time it was taking to repair the windows. She said that it had cost her over £2,000 to keep the property warm since December 2022 and her family had been unwell, due to the cold.
  13. The landlord did not remove and realign the living room window on 19 April 2023, as it had committed. It is unclear from the available evidence, if this appointment was not attended, or if the appointment date was moved. The lack of clarity in the landlord’s records about this was inappropriate. And made it more difficult for us to assess the reasonableness of the landlord’s actions. The landlord confirmed in the concluding stage 1 response on 26 April 2023, that an appointment to repair the windows had been arranged for 10 May 2023.
  14. The landlord considered the resident’s request for compensation as part of its stage 1 investigation. But ultimately made no offer of compensation in the concluding stage 1 complaint response, for the length of time it had taken to resolve the ongoing issues with the windows. This was because it did not accept there had been any failure of service. It argued that the repairs identified were not day to day repairs and had required follow on works, which had already been completed or scheduled in.
  15. However, the landlord did not recognise the likely inconvenience caused to the resident when it did not reinspect the windows on 1 March 2023, as it had committed. And if it had changed its position about making a contribution towards the resident’s increased energy costs, it should have explained this.
  16. Sometime after issue of the concluding stage 1 response, the resident said she was unable to accommodate the window repair scheduled for 10 May 2023. It is understood that the appointment was rebooked for 15 June 2023, in agreement with the resident. While this created further delayed repairing the window, this was beyond the landlord’s control.
  17. The landlord acknowledged in its final stage 2 response, that there had been ongoing repairs to the windows since 9 December 2022. But said it was satisfied that it had been working to get the windows into a satisfactory condition, which would have been resolved on 10 May 2023, had the appointment not been changed. Nonetheless, it did apologise for the length of time it had taken to resolve the issues with the windows and it accepted that it ought to have made a contribution towards the resident’s increased heating expenses, which was fair.
  18. To try to put things right, it made a fair offer of compensation towards the resident’s increased heating expenses, back dated to when the resident first raised concern about drafty windows.
  19. But the landlord ought to have recognised that it had not reinspected the windows on 1 March 2023, as it had committed. And then made a suitable offer of compensation, which reflected the likely inconvenience, time, and trouble that this caused to the resident.

Events after the stage 2 complaint response

  1. The landlord told us on 20 March 2025, that it attended the property on 15 June 2023, “with the intention of reassessing the window”. But the stage 2 complaint response indicates that this appointment had been arranged to complete follow-on work, that it had identified on 23 March 2023.
  2. We have seen comments made by the landlord’s operative following the appointment on 23 March 2023, restating that the living room window needed “realignment”. There was no indication that any attempt was made to remove and realign the living room window on this date, as it had committed in the stage 2 response. We would expect a landlord to meet any commitment that it had given as part of a complaint resolution and to explain to the resident if the situation had changed. Ultimately, the job was left unresolved, which was inappropriate.
  3. We cannot comment on events that happened after this date, given the crossover with the resident’s later complaint. But we note that the landlord’s team manager assessed the condition of the windows in May 2024, and considered the windows to be in a satisfactory condition.
  4. On balance, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows. An order for compensation is made later, which is made in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the shed roof

  1. For context, the landlord raised an inspection on 6 August 2021, for the shed roof, which the resident said was rotten. It was not possible to verify when the roof was inspected, from the available evidence. The outcome of this inspection is also unclear.
  2. According to the stage 2 complaint response, the resident reported more repairs to the shed roof in January 2023, which she said had come off in the wind. This could not be verified from the available evidence and may suggest there was an issue with the landlord’s record keeping.
  3. The resident and landlord exchanged several emails on 13 February 2023. The resident said she was still waiting for the shed roof to be repaired. The landlord said that it did not carry out repairs to sheds, as sheds are gifted to residents. The resident insisted that the shed was the landlord’s responsibility to repair. She reminded it, that it had already inspected and measured up the shed to facilitate its repair. The landlord showed fairness by reconsidering its position. It told the resident that it would push the repair forward and committed to providing the resident with an appointment when it was able. It is understandable that it may not have been able to provide the resident with an appointment date at that time. But it should have been clearer about when it would be in a position to confirm this, to better manage the resident’s expectations.
  4. It was unreasonable that the resident had to actively chase the landlord for an update on 7 March 2023. The landlord told the resident on 14 March 2023, in the stage 1 complaint response, that it would need to come and inspect the shed roof. This suggests that the landlord may not have progressed the shed repairs, as it previously committed.
  5. The landlord raised a works order the following day, to “look at brickwork / roof tile that may need replacing” on the shed. An appointment was subsequently arranged for its operative to inspect the shed in a timely manner, on 23 March 2023.
  6. The landlord’s operative inspected the shed on 23 March 2023, as it had committed. However, the job notes do not mention the shed. There is no evidence that landlord confirmed its next steps to the resident. This is likely to have left the resident uncertain of its intentions, which was unreasonable. The resident was caused added time and trouble chasing the landlord for an update, on 17 April 2023.
  7. The landlord apologised in the concluding stage 1 complaint response on 26 April 2023, for it delay to inspect the shed roof, for which it offered £50 compensation. The landlord said it had instructed its external roofing contractor to inspect the shed and provide a quotation of works, which was encouraging. It said its roofing contractor would make contact with the resident directly, to arrange the inspection.
  8. It was not possible to determine from the available evidence, when the landlord instructed its external contractor, when its contractor carried out the inspection, or when it received the quotation of works. It is possible that this information was not provided to us by the landlord. But may suggest again, that there was an issue with the landlord’s record keeping.
  9. The landlord noted in the stage 2 complaint response on 16 May 2023, that it was still chasing completion of the shed repairs. It apologised for the length of time it had taken to resolve this, for which it offered an additional £250 compensation. This shows that it was taking responsibility for its inaction. It committed to chasing the repairs through to completion, which was positive. However, it would have been better if the landlord had given the resident an anticipated timescale for completing the repair.
  10. It is understood that the shed roof repairs were completed in May 2023, which far exceeded the expected response timescales stated in the landlord’s repairs policy.
  11. The landlord did not repair the shed roof in a timely manner. The landlord did not provide the resident with timely updates concerning the status of the repair, leaving the resident uncertain of the landlord’s intentions. This created added time and trouble for the resident chasing the landlord for updates.
  12. The landlord accepted in its final complaint response, that it had taken longer than it ought to have done to repair the shed roof. It apologised, committed to a course of action to remedy the issue, and offered compensation for the failings it itself had identified.
  13. The overall level of compensation offered by the landlord during the complaint process, in respect of the landlord’s handling of repairs to the shed roof, was proportionate to the likely impact to the resident.
  14. Therefore, on balance, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the shed roof.

The landlord’s record keeping

  1. While we were able to determine this case based on the evidence provided, there were noticeable gaps and omissions in the landlord’s records, as highlighted throughout this report. We would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contact and evidence of its actions relating to each casefile, which can be provided upon request.
  2. Landlords who fail to create and record information accurately, risk missing opportunities to identify its actions are wrong or inadequate. It is likely that inadequacies in the landlord’s record keeping, contributed to the overall delay in resolving the substantive matter of complaint for the resident and led to inadequate redress.
  3. Therefore, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s record keeping and information management. The landlord should identify the reason for the gaps in the information that it provided, following our information request. The landlord should act accordingly thereafter.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme, there was service failure in:
    1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows.
    2. The landlord’s record keeping.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the shed roof.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord must write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified by this investigation.
  2. The landlord must pay £300 compensation directly to the resident, which may be reduced to £50, if the landlord has already paid the £250 compensation it previously offered, in respect of the resident’s increased heating costs. This compensation is made in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance and is broken down as follows:
    1. £250 compensation towards the resident’s increased heating costs, which is calculated at a rate of £50 per month between 9 December 2022 and 16 May 2023. This is consistent with the compensation previously offered by the landlord at stage 2.
    2. £50 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience, time, and trouble caused to the resident, as a result of the landlord not inspecting the windows on 1 March 2023 as it had committed.
  3. As it is not clear if the works have been completed, the landlord must arrange for a suitability qualified member of its staff, to inspect the windows. During the inspection, the landlord must satisfy itself that the windows are fitted correctly and that any drafts have been appropriately mitigated. If further works are identified, it must provide the resident with a written action plan, setting out its timescale for completing those works, and explain how it will keep the resident informed.
  4. The landlord must provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied with the above orders, within 4 weeks of the date of this decision.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should pay the £300 compensation it previously offered, if it has not done so already, for its handling of repairs to the shed roof.
  2. The landlord should identify the reason for the gaps in the information that it provided, following our information request. The landlord should act accordingly thereafter.
  3. The landlord should consider uploading a copy of its compensation policy and procedure onto its website, for transparency.