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

The Riverside Group Limited (202324500)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202324500

The Riverside Group Limited

24 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 landlord’s response to the resident’s repair requests.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling as part of the investigation.

Background

  1. The resident was the tenant of the property which the complaint concerns. The resident’s tenancy started on 25 April 2023 and ended on 29 September 2024. The landlord owns the property.
  2. The property is a first floor 1 bedroom flat.
  3. On 30 August 2023 the resident made a complaint to the landlord by telephone about the condition of the property. In summary the resident said:
    1. Despite reporting repairs to the property and wider block the landlord had not taken action to address the issues.
    2. Some of the repairs were outstanding from the previous tenant of the property.
    3. The repairs inside the property included cracked flooring, faulty immersion heater and faulty doorbell.
    4. It was unfair that the landlord was recharging him for a repair to the bathroom door. He explained that he had to force the door open as the latch had failed. He had reported the issue with the latch at the start of his tenancy.
    5. The lino on the communal stairs was lifting away which was a health and safety hazard.
  4. On 31 August 2023 the landlord provided its stage 1 response. In summary the landlord said:
    1. It had raised work orders to investigate and repair the doorbell, bathroom door and replace the lino in the boiler cupboard following a leak.
    2. A repair was scheduled for “today” to address the fault to the immersion heater.
    3. A repair to address a fault to the window was attended on 16 August 2023. Following the appointment the repair was passed on its external contractor on 21 August 2023. The contractor would be in touch with the resident to “complete the repair”.
    4. It would not recharge the resident for the repair to the bathroom door.
    5. It would like to offer the resident £25 compensation as a goodwill gesture for the time taken to resolve the repair issues within the property.
  5. On 27 September 2023 the landlord wrote to the resident following a telephone call with him to confirm that it had escalated the complaint to stage 2. The landlord confirmed that the resident had requested to escalate the complaint as all repair issues had not been resolved. This included the immersion heater, doorbell, bathroom door, flooring in boiler cupboard and the window.
  6. On 17 October 2023 the landlord provided its stage 2, final, response. In summary the landlord said:
    1. A repairs supervisor attended the property during week commencing 2 October 2023 “to ensure all required works were resolved” – no further details given.
    2. All repairs which it was responsible for had been completed – no further details given. It explained that while the resident wanted a “9 volt battery operated doorbell” installed it was “not willing” to replace the current doorbell as it was in “good working order”.
    3. The new bathroom door was being fitted on 24 October 2023.
  7. The landlord concluded by confirming that the resident may refer the complaint to us if he was not happy with its decision.
  8. Following the landlord’s final response the resident referred the complaint to us. In summary the resident said that he was unhappy with the landlord’s response as he disagreed that all repair issues within the property and communal areas had been addressed. 

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s repair requests

  1. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord must keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property as well as the installations  for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation. These obligations are set out in the tenancy agreement for the property.
  2. A landlord is not liable to carry out any repair until it has been put on notice of the need for repair. The landlord must then carry out the repair within a reasonable time thereafter. As the repairs reported by the resident could fall within the repair obligations of the landlord it was required to investigate and to make good any issues identified.
  3. The landlord has provided its contemporaneous records to demonstrate its response to the repair issues raised by the resident as part of the complaint.
  4. The communal stairs – the landlord’s records document that it raised a work order on 22 May 2023 for “lino flooring lifting all over communal area”. Following the work order measurements were taken on 27 June 2023 so that it could obtain quotes for replacement flooring. The landlord approved the cost for the new flooring in mid-August 2023 with the works being undertaken in September 2023. The landlord’s response to this repair issue was appropriate as it took steps to replace the flooring which was defective within a reasonable period of time.
  5. The immersion heater – the landlord’s records document that the resident began raising issues with the immersion heater shortly after the start of his tenancy. The records show that between 3 May 2023 and 17 October 2023, the date of the landlord’s final response, the landlord attended the property on at least 8 occasions. The records detailing the appointments confirm that the landlord gave the resident advice on the correct operation of the immersion heater, reset the timers, tested the elements, replaced the fuse and resolved a leak. Following a review of the records we have not identified any appointments where the records indicate that the resident was left without heating or hot water or follow on appointments were not completed within a reasonable period of time. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the immersion heater was therefore appropriate.
  6. Cracked flooring – the landlord’s records document that it raised a work order on 2 May 2023 for “10m crack from front to rear living room and kitchen”. The work order was marked as completed on 27 June 2023 following a repair to screed the “expansion join” on the concrete floor. The landlord’s response to this repair issue was appropriate as it took steps to resolve the issue with the flooring in the property within a reasonable period of time.
  7. The doorbell – the landlord’s records document that it attended the property on 31 August 2023 to inspect the doorbell. The landlord confirmed that the “transformer [was] not working”. It therefore isolated the doorbell and arranged a follow on work order to complete the repair. The repair was completed on 25 September 2023 when it replaced the doorbell. On 29 September 2023 the resident reported that the doorbell was not working again. The landlord’s records confirm that the doorbell was checked on 5 October 2023 and found to be in working order. The landlord’s response to this repair issue was appropriate as it repaired the doorbell within a reasonable period of time.
  8. We note that the while the complaint was live the resident requested that the landlord replace the wired doorbell with a battery operated one. The landlord declined the resident’s request. This was reasonable as the landlord confirmed following the repair on 25 September 2023 the doorbell was in working order. 
  9. Bathroom door – the landlord’s records document that the first contact by the resident regarding the bathroom door was on 26 June 2023 where he reported an issue with the “latch and handle”. An appointment was made for 10 August 2023 however it did not go ahead due to “no access” by the resident. The records confirm that the landlord “carded” the property after waiting half an hour to see if access could be gained. This was appropriate.
  10. The records show that the bathroom door was replaced on 24 October 2023 in response to the resident raising the issue as part of the complaint. It was appropriate that the landlord sought to address the repair following the complaint as the issue was outstanding. We acknowledge that the timeframe for replacing the door following the complaint was protracted which will have been frustrating for the resident.
  11. The landlord’s decision to not recharge the resident for damage to the bathroom door was reasonable as it understood that the damage was caused due to an outstanding repair issue which had prevented proper use of the door.
  12. Window – the landlord’s records document that the resident raised a repair request for the living room window on 27 July 2023. The landlord attended the property on 16 August 2023 where it identified that the window hinges required replacement. It therefore raised a work order with its specialist contractor on 21 August 2023 to complete the repair. The records indicate that the repair was completed on 3 November 2023. This was a protracted period of time. From the records it is not clear why the repair took approximately 3 months to complete following handover to the contractor. We acknowledge that while the repair was outstanding it will have been frustrating for the resident.
  13. Lino in boiler cupboard – the landlord’s records are not completely clear regarding the replacement of the lino in the boiler cupboard. From the available information we understand that the repair was raised in response to the resident’s complaint dated August 2023. The records show that an invoice was paid on 19 October 2023 for renewal of “vinyl flooring in boiler cupboard” indicating that the repair was completed shortly before this date. The repair therefore took approximately 2 months to complete. This was a protracted period of time which will have been frustrating for the resident.
  14. Overall, while some of the repairs took longer than would reasonably be expected, the repairs service provided by the landlord was satisfactory. This is because the landlord took steps to ensure that a remedy was provided for all repair issues by the conclusion of the complaint procedure therefore resulting in minor inconvenience to the resident. We further note that none of the repairs which were delayed would have been classed as urgent or emergency issues. There was therefore no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s repair requests. 
  15. In responding to the complaint at stage 1 the landlord offered the resident £25 compensation as a goodwill gesture for the time taken to resolve the repair issues within the property. This was reasonable as the landlord had acknowledged that the resident had taken time and trouble to bring the repair issues to its attention.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. While the landlord’s complaint responses were provided in line with the requirements of the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code),10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2, there were failings within the landlord’s stage 2 response.
  2. The code sets out that in responding to a complaint landlords must address all points raised and provide clear reasons and explanations for any decisions. In responding to the complaint at stage 2 the landlord did not do this. This is unsatisfactory. At stage 2 the landlord said a supervisor attended the property to ensure all works were resolved and all repairs it was responsible for had been completed. The landlord did not then go to detail the findings of the supervisor or provide evidence of the works completed. This would have been helpful in order for the resident to have understood the landlord’s position on each of the repair issues – especially as he disputed that all repair issues in the property and communal areas had been resolved following its response. This therefore denied the resident a comprehensive response to the complaint.  
  3. There was service failure by the landlord in its complaint handling. This is because the landlord did not provide a comprehensive response to the complaint providing proper explanations to support its findings.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the Ombudsman finds:
    1. No maladministration by the landlord in response to the resident’s repair requests.
    2. Service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord should pay the resident a total of £125 compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this determination. This figures includes the £25 which the landlord offered itself if it has not already been paid in addition to an extra £100 for poor complaint handling. By not providing a comprehensive response at stage 2 the landlord was not able to support the decision it had made and therefore the resident will not have been clear on what had actually happened.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should ensure that its complaint handling staff are aware of their responsibilities under the Code to provide comprehensive complaint responses, which provide sufficient details and reason to support its decisions.