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

London Borough of Brent (202415446)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202415446

London Borough of Brent

10 June 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 landlords handling of repairs to the resident’s kitchen and roof.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has been a secure tenant of a 3-bedroom house since 1989. The resident used her local councillor as a representative during her complaint to the landlord.
  2. On 1 November 2023 the landlord raised a work order to repair plaster in the resident’s kitchen, following a leak from the roof. Some repairs were carried out in November 2023 and January 2024 but not completed.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 30 January 2024. She said the repairs remained outstanding.
  4. On 12 February 2024 the landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident. It upheld her complaint and offered £250 compensation for the delays in completing repairs.
  5. The resident asked the landlord to review her complaint on 6 March 2024. She said it had not carried out the repairs. The landlord did not escalate her complaint.
  6. The resident contacted us on 15 July 2024. We wrote to the landlord on 2 December 2024. We asked it to reply to the resident’s complaint.
  7. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 6 January 2025. It apologised and offered a further £500 compensation for not completing the repairs or replying to her complaint. It said it would inspect the property and arrange the outstanding works.
  8. The resident told us on 7 January 2025 she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s complaint response.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the repairs to the resident’s kitchen and roof

  1. The landlord’s records do not show when the resident first reported issues with her kitchen. On 1 November 2023 the landlord raised a work order as it said the plaster on the kitchen walls was wet.
  2. The landlord recorded on 5 November 2023 there was a leak from the roof which caused the wet plaster and affected the electrical sockets in the kitchen. The landlord’s electrician attended the same day. The landlord’s repairs policy states it should repair an unsafe electrical fitting within 1 day. Although the landlord’s response was within its policy timescale, its records do not provide an outcome of the visit or whether the electrics were made safe.
  3. The landlord raised a work order on 6 November 2023 to repair the roof. Roofing contractors attended on 11 November 2023. Temporary repairs to the roof were carried out over several days following the appointment. The landlord’s repairs policy states it should repair a leaking roof within 7 days. It is reasonable for a landlord to arrange temporary repairs on complex projects such as a roof. This is because it is likely specialist contractors or equipment such a scaffolding are required. Further long-standing repairs should be scheduled after such temporary repairs in order to resolve the issue for the resident. The landlord’s response to temporarily repair the roof was within its policy timescale, however, it did not arrange further repairs to the roof.
  4. On 21 November 2023 the landlord’s repair operative attended the property. They said the roof leak had damaged 2 kitchen units, the kitchen ceiling and walls. The landlord’s policy classifies these repair issues as routine repairs. Its repairs policy states it should check routine repair issues within 28 days and complete the necessary repairs within 10 working days.
  5. The landlord’s contractor carried out partial repairs to the kitchen walls on 4 January 2024. This was outside of the landlord’s repair’s policy timescale. The contractor told the landlord further repairs to the roof and kitchen wall were required. They also said the damaged units needed to be replaced.
  6. The resident complained to the landlord on 30 January 2024. She said it had failed to complete the outstanding repairs at the property. The evidence confirms no action had been taken since the operative visit on 4 January 2024.
  7. The landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 9 February 2024. They said the repairs to the roof and kitchen had not been completed. They requested an emergency electrician attend to make the electrics safe and the roof be covered to stop further leaks.
  8. On 12 February 2024 the landlord sent its response to the resident at stage 1 of its complaints process. It upheld her complaint. The landlord accepted the property appeared to be in a poor condition due to the repairs not being completed. The landlord said it had arranged for the roof to be repaired, and for remedial works to take place. It did not say when the repairs would happen. The landlord apologised to the resident and offered £250 compensation for the inconvenience the delays in completing the repairs caused.
  9. A review of the landlord’s complaint response shows it accepted its failings by not carrying out repairs as per its repairs policy. It apologised and offered compensation to the resident for the delays. However, it did not say when say when the outstanding repair works would be carried out. The failure to identify a schedule by which the resident’s complaint would be resolved was unreasonable.
  10. The resident emailed the landlord on 6 March 2024. She asked it to escalate her complaint. She said no action had been taken to repair the kitchen or roof since the landlord’s complaint response. The landlord acknowledged the email the following day. It said it would contact her within 7-10 working days.
  11. On 15 July 2024 the resident contacted us. She said the landlord had not responded to her complaint. She said the repairs were still outstanding. The evidence confirms there was no record of any action being taken by the landlord to this point from the date since its stage 1 response.
  12. The resident’s elected Councillor contacted the landlord on 30 September 2024. The landlord replied to the Councillor on 3 October 2024. It apologised for the repair delays. The landlord said its contractor would contact the resident within 7 working days to arrange the repairs.
  13. The landlord’s records do not say when the contractor contacted the resident. The records show they arranged to attend the property on 25 November and 3 December 2024. There is no evidence a contractor attended on either date.
  14. We wrote to the landlord on 2 December 2024. We asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint from March 2024. The landlord emailed the resident and acknowledged her escalated complaint on 10 December 2024.
  15. The landlord and the resident exchanged emails on 17 December 2024. The resident said the roof had been repaired but not the outstanding works in the kitchen. The landlord has not provided records of when the roof was repaired.
  16. On 17 December 2024 the landlord told the resident its contractor said she had told them on 25 November 2024 no works were required. The resident replied and said that was incorrect. She said the contractor contacted her in error about work due on her neighbour’s property.
  17. On 6 January 2025 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It said the repairs to the kitchen and roof had previously been cancelled in error. It added there had been a miscommunication from its contractor on 25 November 2025, which caused further delays. The landlord said its contractor apologised repairs were not carried out as planned. 
  18. The landlord said it had arranged for a surveyor to inspect the property on 20 January 2025. It said it would arrange the outstanding remedial work. The landlord apologised and offered a further £400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by delays in completing the repairs.
  19. Analysis of the landlord’s complaint response shows it accepted there had been delays in carrying out repairs and remedial work at the property. It apologised and offered redress for its lack of action and arranged for a surveyor to inspect the property. The landlord’s complaint response recognised its failures, and it sought to arrange the works outstanding.
  20. The resident contacted us on 7 January 2025. She said she was not happy with the landlord’s response to her complaint.
  21. On 20 January 2025 the landlord’s surveyor inspected the property. They raised a schedule of remedial works for the kitchen. The resident has told us works were arranged for April 2025, but they did not go ahead due to a further roof leak being repaired instead. The resident said she took a week off work to be available for the kitchen repairs, but they did not happen. The landlord has confirmed to us the repairs remain outstanding.
  22. When a failure is identified, as in this case, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right, and Learn from Outcomes, as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  23. The evidence shows by the end of the landlord’s complaint response the resident still had repairs required to her roof and kitchen. The evidence shows a series of miscommunication and poor management of the required works by the landlord through its contractor. This led to substantial delays and a level of service beyond the landlord’s policy timescales, and which was overall unreasonable in length. The level of compensation offered was not commensurate with the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failures.
  24. Following the stage 2 response, the landlord has not sought to expedite the necessary works to put things right. The evidence shows the landlord has yet to complete the outstanding repairs to the kitchen which have been ongoing for over 16 months. The many failures identified above and the landlord’s inability to resolve the matter for the resident leads to a determination of maladministration.
  25. The landlord is ordered to pay £850 compensation to the resident for its failure to carry out repairs up to when it concluded its internal complaints process and the significant impact this has had on the resident. The landlord is also ordered to pay an additional £300 compensation to the resident for the continued failure to carry out repairs to the kitchen since January 2025, and the further distress and inconvenience this had caused the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of acknowledging them and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 30 January 2024. It acknowledged the complaint the same day.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 12 February 2024, which was within its policy timescale.
  4. On 6 March 2024 the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated. The landlord acknowledged it the following day which was also within its policy timescale. 
  5. The landlord did not escalate the resident’s complaint. She contacted us on 15 July 2024. We wrote to the landlord on 2 December 2024. It acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 10 December 2024. This was around 9 months after the resident’s initial request.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 6 January 2025. It apologised and offered £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience in not dealing with the complaint following the escalation in March 2024.
  7. In summary, the landlord did not adhere to its policy timescale at stage 2 of its complaint process. The landlord’s failure to escalate the complaint led to a significant delay, which ultimately substantially prolonged the resident’s wait for resolution. The landlord’s handling of its complaints process was similar to its overall handling of the substantive complaint point. The evidence points toward a mismanaged process which caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  8. The landlord apologised and offered £100 redress for the 10-month delay. This amount of compensation was not reflective of the inconvenience caused by its failure. The failure to offer appropriate compensation to the resident for the delays in replying to her complaint leads to a determination of maladministration. An order for increased compensation has been made below.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s kitchen and roof.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay £1,400 compensation to the resident. The landlord may deduct the sum of £750 awarded as part of its internal complaints process, if already paid. The balance should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any rent or service charge account. The compensation is broken down as follows:
      1. £1,150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s kitchen and roof.
      2. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling failures.
    3. Survey the property and produce a schedule of works for any outstanding repairs. The survey must take place within 2 weeks of the date of this report. A copy will be provided to the resident and this Service. The landlord will produce a schedule of required works for identified issues which will commence within 4 weeks from the date of the survey. A copy of the schedule will be shared with both the resident and this Service.