Clarion Housing Association Limited (202321424)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202321424

Clarion Housing Association Limited

30 May 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The repairs to put right the damage from a water leak in the resident’s property.
2. The resident’s associated complaint.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord for a 2–bedroom flat. She is disabled and vulnerable. She has carers who visit multiple times a day and stay overnight. Her family members (referred to collectively in this report as ‘the representative’) manage all her affairs.
On 18 April 2023 the representative told the landlord that water was leaking from the flat above into the resident’s bedroom. In July 2023 they reported that water was running down the resident’s bathroom walls. The landlord carried out a temporary fix on 17 July 2023 and the leak was resolved on 6 November 2023.
The representative said they made several complaints to the landlord on behalf of the resident between April and July 2023 but received no response. On 19 July 2023 they wrote to the landlord’s chief customer officer to escalate the complaint. They said:
1. They were frustrated with the landlord’s inability to understand the resident’s situation and notify its operatives before appointments that she was disabled and vulnerable.
2. Every time the representative spoke to the landlord they had to explain how to access the property using the key safe. They wanted written assurance that operatives would be provided with the correct access instructions for future gas safety checks without them having to be present.
3. They wanted compensation for 2 cancelled gas safety check appointments.
4. They wanted the landlord to resolve the water leak and complete the repairs to the resident’s bedroom and bathroom ceiling.
5. The landlord had allowed the leak to escalate to a potentially life threatening situation. The landlord’s contractor told the representative the water leak in the bathroom was going into the electrics and was unsafe, and the resident relied on a lifeline that required power. They asked for £500 compensation for the distress this caused the resident.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 28 August 2023. In its response it:
1. Accepted that its gas engineers missed 2 appointments. It said it would discuss compensation for this directly with the representative.
2. Said the leak was resolved. A project officer would take ownership of the outstanding works and would tell its contractors to confirm appointments with the representative and to use the key safe.
3. Offered £300 compensation for:
  1. Not resolving the leak within its agreed timescales.
  2. The representative repeatedly chasing updates.
  3. Not taking the resident’s vulnerabilities into consideration.
  4. Repeated visits.
  5. The inconvenience caused to the resident.
The representative asked to escalate the resident’s complaint on 13 September 2023. They said:
1. They wanted evidence the landlord had resolved the leak.
2. The landlord’s operatives attending appointments were still unaware the resident was disabled and vulnerable.
3. They wanted compensation for missed appointments, travel costs, loss of wages for appointments and meetings, and distress and inconvenience caused.
The representative asked us to support them to escalate the complaint. We contacted the landlord on 6 December 2023 and asked it to issue a stage 2 response by 14 December 2023.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 13 December 2023. In its response it:
1. Apologised for the delay in providing its stage 2 response.
2. Said its heating contractor had agreed to attend in pairs when the representative could not be present. The representative would need to confirm the key safe code before appointments.
3. Confirmed the heating contractor would pay £30 for the 2 missed appointments, which was in line with its compensation policy.
4. Said its in house team completed the repair to the leaking tap in the flat above on 6 November 2023. Works to rectify the damage from the leak were started on 6 December 2023. Follow on works would be completed on 20 December 2023.
5. Offered £600 compensation, which was broken down as:
  1. £300 offered at stage 1.
  2. £200 for the delays in resolving the leak, inconvenience caused, and its lack of consideration of the resident’s disability and vulnerabilities.
  3. £50 for the delay in carrying out repairs.
  4. £50 for the delay in issuing its stage 2 response.
When the representative initially contacted the Ombudsman, they were seeking our help to get the leak resolved. In May 2025 the representative told us they no longer needed us to investigate the landlord’s handling of the leak or the gas safety check appointments as the landlord acknowledged its failings in its complaint procedure. They asked us to investigate the landlord’s handling of:
1. The repairs to put right the damage from the water leak and the level of compensation offered.
2. Their associated complaint.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The representative told us they made several complaints to the landlord on behalf of the resident between April and July 2023. This investigation will focus on the complaint dated 19 July 2023. We will investigate the landlord’s handling of the leak from when the representative first reported it in April 2023 up to the landlord’s final complaint response dated December 2023. Our investigation will also include any actions the landlord stated it would take in its complaint responses that took place after the expiry of the complaints procedure.
We can consider whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action has caused any distress and inconvenience to the resident. However, we are unable to establish whether the resident’s health and wellbeing was impacted. This would be down to a court to decide.
We are unable to consider the representative’s request to be compensated for the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused to them. This is because a family member of a resident who does not hold a landlord/tenant relationship with the landlord themselves is not entitled to complain to us, except as a representative of the person in the landlord/tenant relationship. We have considered the request for the resident to be compensated for distress and inconvenience caused.

The landlord’s handling of the repairs to put right the damage from a water leak in the resident’s property

We find maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the repairs to put right the damage from a water leak. The reasons for our findings are below.
A landlord that has an obligation to repair must also rectify damage to decorations as a result of the repair work. This includes both damage that occurred because the landlord failed to carry out repairs and damage caused by the repair work itself.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states emergency repairs should be attended within 24 hours and works to make safe or temporarily repair should be completed at this visit. Further repairs may then subsequently be required. The policy states it will carry out non-emergency repairs within 28 calendar days of a repair being reported.
The representative reported a leak in the resident’s bedroom on 18 April 2023. The landlord carried out a temporary fix to the water leak on 17 July 2023, 3 months later. This was significantly outside the landlord’s timescales for emergency and non-emergency repairs. The landlord resolved the leak in November 2023, 7 months after the representative first reported the leak. This was a significant delay which impacted the damage caused to the internal decoration of the resident’s property.
In September 2023 the landlord’s records state it provided a dehumidifier to help dry out the resident’s property. Its records did not state how long the resident had the dehumidifier for or whether the landlord discussed or provided compensation for the cost of running it.
In its stage 2 complaint response dated 13 December 2023, the landlord said it had completed some internal repairs on 6 December 2023 and it would complete all follow–on works on 20 December 2023. It said these included painting “a section of the ceiling”. The representative told us an operative attended on 20 December 2023 but no works were carried out. The landlord’s records state it painted part of the ceiling on 8 February 2024. This was significantly outside its target timescale of 28 calendar days.
The representative told us they were not informed about the appointment on 8 February 2024. The landlord has not provided any evidence to show it informed them. The operative painted a section of the ceiling around the resident, who was present and bed bound. The representative had no opportunity to warn the resident that someone was going to be entering and carrying out works in her property. This was a significant failure which put a vulnerable resident at potential risk.
The representative provided evidence to show the operative left the paint and tools for the resident to finish painting the ceiling. The landlord was aware of the resident’s disability and that the representative did not live close by. There was no evidence the landlord considered this and whether it was reasonable that it only decorated part of the ceiling. This was a failing, especially when it had acknowledged in its complaint responses that there had been delays in it resolving the leak, which had led to further damage to the property. The representative told us they had to pay for a decorator to finish the painting.
The landlord said the delay in completing the painting was because the resident needed to be moved into respite care. Its records show on 20 December 2023 the representative said the resident may be able go into respite care at the end of January 2024 or early February 2024. There was no evidence the landlord communicated or discussed this further with the representative between 20 December 2023 and 8 February 2024.
Landlords are required to create and maintain adequate records to be able to demonstrate that they have complied with their repair obligations. There was a clear failure by the landlord in this case to record information about its repair appointments, and its communication with the representative and contractors. This lack of records is likely to have affected its ability to manage the repairs.
The landlord said the compensation it offered would be used to offset rent or other arears. Although this is in line with its compensation policy, the policy states that each case will be considered individually. There was no evidence the landlord considered whether this would be reasonable in light of the fact that the compensation payment was made due to the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. The representative raised concerns to the landlord that, as the resident relied on benefits to pay her rent, which were paid in arrears, the compensation paid on to the resident’s rent account would benefit the landlord. There was no evidence the landlord responded to the representative.
In summary, there was a delay in the landlord completing the internal repair works. There was evidence of poor communication and record keeping. The landlord also failed to address the dehumidifier costs in its complaint responses. We have reviewed the whole complaint and the representative’s account of the impact the delays in resolving the leak. From the evidence provided it was difficult to understand the impact the leak and the damage to the property had on the resident, and whether there was a loss of enjoyment of the bedroom and bathroom. The landlord offered £550 compensation for its handling of the leak. This was in line with its compensation policy, which states it will offer between £250 and £700 when there are considerable failures but no permanent impact on the resident.
Although the landlord tried to put things right during its complaints procedure, we have not found reasonable redress as it failed to carry out the internal repairs within the timescale promised in its stage 2 response. There was evidence of continuing poor communication and it failed to consider the resident’s vulnerabilities and whether it was reasonable in the circumstances to leave her to complete the decorating works. The landlord failed to show it had learnt from the complaint.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

We find maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. The reasons for our findings are below.
At the time of the resident’s complaints, the landlord was operating what it referred to as its “interim” complaints policy. The policy states that both stage 1 and 2 complaints must be acknowledged and logged within 10 working days of receipt. It aimed to respond to new complaints within 20 working days of the complaint being logged. It referred to the stage 2 as a “peer review”, which it will aim to conclude within 40 working days.
On 19 July 2023 the representative raised a complaint to the landlord on behalf of the resident. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 27 July 2023. This was within its target response time of 10 working days.
The landlord’s records show that on 4 August 2023 it identified that it did not have a signed delegated authority to process the complaint in the representative’s name. Under the Equality Act 2010, landlords are required to take positive steps to ensure disabled residents can access their services as easily as non-disabled residents. Landlords should make adjustments when disabled residents are placed at a substantial disadvantage because of their disability compared to non-disabled people. The reasonable adjustment duty is ‘anticipatory’, meaning landlords cannot wait until a disabled resident needs to use their service. They must consider in advance what disabled residents may reasonably need to access their services.
The landlord was aware the resident could not communicate with third parties and the family dealt with her affairs. No evidence has been provided to show the landlord considered that it would need a delegated authority form prior to this complaint and whether any wider adjustments were needed or assessed. This was a significant failing and was likely one of the factors which resulted in the representative’s complaints not being recorded or responded to.
When the landlord acknowledged the complaint, it failed to state when the representative should expect its response. However, it did meet with the representative on 3 August 2023 to discuss the complaint. This was customer focused and showed the landlord wanted to resolve the complaint.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 21 August 2023. This was within its target response time of 20 working days. In its response the landlord gave incorrect information, such as the date the representative made the complaint. It failed to investigate all of the complaint issues, such as why it had failed to accept the resident’s previous complaints. There was also evidence it failed to fully investigate the complaint issues, as it stated the water leak had been resolved when it was still ongoing.
The representative escalated the complaint on 13 September 2023. The landlord acknowledged this on 20 October 2023, 28 working days later, which was outside its 10 working day target response time. This was an inappropriate delay which prolonged the resolution of the complaint.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 13 December 2023. Although this was within its target timescale of 40 working days, in its acknowledgment email the landlord said it would respond within 20 working days. The landlord did contact the representative on 17 November and 1 December 2023 to say there would be a delay. However, it failed to provide a date when they could expect a response. This led to the representative chasing updates and contacting our service for assistance. The landlord failed to effectively communicate with the resident and manage her expectations.
The landlord’s stage 2 response also gave incorrect dates on which the representative had contacted it. Its response was not clearly set out and was difficult to understand. For example, it stated works were scheduled for 6 November 2023, however, this date was prior to the date of the stage 2 response. The response at some points was addressed to the resident and others to the representative. It listed all the issues the representative raised when escalating the complaint, but failed to address all these issues when it said how it was going to resolve the complaint.
In summary, there was a delay in the landlord acknowledging and escalating the complaint, and issuing its stage 2 response. There was evidence of poor communication and record keeping. Its responses lacked clarity, included incorrect information and failed to show it had fully investigated all the complaint issues. The landlord acknowledged the delay in it issuing its stage 2 complaint response and offered the resident £50 compensation. We feel this amount of compensation did not reflect the failures identified in this investigation.

Determination

There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repairs to put right the damage from a water leak in the resident’s property (paragraph 52 of the Scheme).
There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint (paragraph 52 of the Scheme).

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident £900 compensation. This is broken down as:
  1. £600 offered by the landlord in its stage 2 complaint response dated 13 December 2023.
  2. £200 for the additional time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused to her by its handing of the repairs to put right the damage from a water leak.
  3. £100 for the additional time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused to her by its handing of her associated complaint.
  4. All payments must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to her rent account, unless otherwise agreed by the resident.

Recommendations

The landlord should ensure its staff are fully trained to identify vulnerable residents and accurately record this on their systems. If delegated authority forms are needed these must be filled out at the earliest opportunity.
The landlord should ensure its staff are trained to accurately record reasonable adjustments so all departments are aware of them and contractors can be informed.