Hyde Housing Association Limited (202122064)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202122064

Hyde Housing Association Limited

23 January 2023

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

This complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s decision not to respond to the resident’s concerns about disrepair to her property through its complaints policy.
2. Delays in the landlord providing the resident with its responses to her complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord. The property is a first floor, 2 bedroom flat. The tenancy commenced on 14 August 2017.

Scope

Paragraph 42(e) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, concerns matters where a complainant has, or had, the opportunity to raise the subject matter of the complaints as part of court proceedings.
On 5 September 2022, the resident’s solicitor filed a disrepair claim with the court. The court issued the claim on 22 November 2022. A consent order was with the court from 16 March 2023 and put in front of a judge on 24 March 2023. The court issued the consent order and proceedings were stayed until 16 May 2023 for either:
1. The resident to notify the court that the claim had been settled.
2. The resident and the landlord write to the court requesting an extension of the stay period.
3. The Claimant and Defendant write to the court requesting directions to be set, including provision for, the filing and service of a Defence within 28 days following the expiration of the stay.
The landlord has confirmed that the case was then vacated, by consent order, and that it was still seeking to negotiate a settlement with the resident.
A consent order is a judgment or order made by the court, the terms of which would have been agreed in advance by the parties. As the settlement, which is currently being negotiated by the resident, her legal representative and the landlord, is in relation to this consent order, the matters that are being considered as part of that negotiation will not be considered any further in this report.
However, the Ombudsman has used his discretion in this case to consider whether it was fair and reasonable for the landlord to decide not to respond to the resident’s concerns about the disrepair to her property through its complaints process and the delays in it responding to that complaint. This is because the court proceedings were not issued until after its final response to her complaint and no evidence has been seen of these matters being included in either the disrepair claim made by the resident nor the negotiations referred to above.

Summary of events

On 26 January 2021, the resident logged a formal complaint with the landlord about a number of repairs to her property, including: that she had been told that she needed new windows as they had all been blown, that her heating had been broken since 12 January 2021, her kitchen was falling apart and her shower sounded like a plane was taking off. The resident said that her father had passed away on 12 January 2021 and that she was under immense stress and really needed the repairs done. The resident said that she was being passed around and around and that her home was falling apart.
On 4 March 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint, apologised that the level of service had fallen below that expected and confirmed that a stage 1 complaint had been raised.
On 12 March 2021, the resident’s solicitor issued the landlord with a Pre Action Protocol letter. The defects listed in the letter were that:
1. There was no heating throughout the property.
2. Windows and doors were blown throughout the property and water was present between the panes of glass no matter what the weather.
3. The kitchen cupboards were in a state of disrepair and required changing.
On 7 December 2021, the resident emailed the landlord’s disrepair team to complain that since 2 December 2021 the property had been uninhabitable due to the major works being carried out. The resident said that the contractor had asked her to find somewhere else to stay for a week, which she had done. However, from 8 December 2021, she had nowhere to stay and so would need alternative accommodation. The resident also complained about the standard of the work that had been carried out and that when she asked the contractor for an order of works, she was told to get it from her solicitors.
On 10 December 2021, the resident logged formal complaint with the landlord about the repairs to her property and the attitude of the contractors, which she said was poor. The resident said that:
1. The decant team had placed her in a hotel and that she had received a call there, from her neighbour, to say that there was a flood coming from her property into theirs. The fire brigade also contacted her to gain access and so she had to give her neighbour the code to the key safe to let the fire brigade in. The resident said that she called the landlord’s out of hours for 3 hours to get a plumber to attend and isolate the flood.
2. The new floor that had just been laid was soaking wet, as was her other flooring and that of her neighbour.
3. She wanted the contractor to be changed and the repairs completed, damage addressed and items replaced so that she could return to her property as soon as possible.
4. She wanted to be compensated and had contacted her solicitor.
The resident raised further complaints with the landlord on 21 and 29 December 2021 about the repairs, and about the contractors making ‘‘a mess of everything’’.
On 4 January 2022, the resident logged a further formal complaint with the landlord in which she said:
1. That she had been without hot water again for 3 days and that all the plugs were burnt and she needed to wiggle the spur leads to get it working, which she said was dangerous. An engineer attended on 30 December 2021 but said that they could not fix it and an electrician was due to attend that day but had not done so, despite her staying in all day.
2. She had had ‘‘non-stop’’ problems with her property and repairs for over a year and had been decanted before Christmas. The contractor had destroyed her home, that she had made multiple complaints about this and had instructed solicitors.
On 18 January 2022, the resident contacted this Dervice to say that she had had ongoing issues and outstanding repairs to her property for over a year and that recent repairs had caused lots of damage to her property. The resident also said that she would told by the landlord’s decant team that she would be reimbursed for parking costs but they still had not answered her. The resident attached a copy of the complaint she made to the landlord on 26 January 2021.
On 20 January 2022:
1. The resident provided this Service with copies of her email to the landlord’s disrepair team of 7 December 2021 and her formal complaints to the landlord of 21 and 29 December 2021, and 4 January 2022.
2. This Service wrote to the landlord to advise that the resident had stated that she had made a complaint to the landlord but had not yet received a response. The landlord was advised that the complaint concerned responsive repairs and reimbursement costs and was asked to provide the resident with a response within the next 10 working days.
3. The complaint was acknowledged by the landlord.
The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 17 March 2022. The landlord said that it was sorry that it had not done the repairs quicker. However, as the resident had a legal disrepair claim, any progress with the repairs going forward, as well as further settlement and reimbursements, would need to be discussed with her solicitor. The landlord went on to:
1. Acknowledge that there had been a delay in its response to the resident’s complaint for which it offered £50 compensation. The landlord explained that its team had been experiencing unexpected staff shortages that had impacted its unusual delivery times, and that it was currently undertaking a number of actions to ensure it responds quicker.
2. Explain that under its complaints policy, it could only investigate back 6 months prior to the complaint being made, noting that a complaint had been made in 2021. It did not respond to that complaint as the resident had not responded to the resolution officer at that time as she had said that her solicitor had told her they would resolve the matters.
3. Say that it was sorry that the works to the resident’s home had still not been completed and acknowledged that she was unhappy with the quality of the works that had been done. The landlord also noted that the resident had said that the conduct of its contractors had been poor and confirmed that all these issues had been fed back to its disrepair team so that the contractors could address this internally with their staff members.
On 24 April 2022, the resident contacted this Service to say that she was still having problems with her housing and repairs. The resident said that the repairs had still not been fixed and the contractors had been rude, wasted her time and damaged her property. The resident said that this was having a bad impact on her mental health and that she had a solicitor but they did not seem to be doing much to help her. The resident was advised to escalate her concerns with her landlord to the next stage of the complaints process.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 26 May 2022 and said that it would provide its full reply and decision by 27 June 2022. The landlord also repeated its position that as the resident had a legal disrepair claim, any progress with the repairs going forward, as well as further settlement and reimbursements, would need to be discussed with her solicitor.
On 27 June 2022, the landlord wrote to the resident, advising that it would need more time to check the details of her complaint and that it would provide her with a full response by 11 July 2022.
The landlord issued its final response on 6 July 2022 in which it:
1. Again repeated that as the resident had a legal disrepair claim, any progress with the repairs going forward, as well as further settlement and reimbursements, would need to be discussed with her solicitor.
2. Said that having once again reviewed the resident’s experience up to the point at which it had received her legal disrepair claim, and taking into account that it could only investigate service failures that may have occurred up to six months prior to receipt of the complaint, it could see no reason to change its decision with regards to her complaint.
3. Re-offered the resident the £50 compensation awarded in its stage 1 response for its complaint handling failure and advised that if she were unhappy with its response she could now refer her complaint to this Service.

Matters that occurred following the landlord’s final response.

On 17 October 2023, the landlord sent the resident a follow on response to her complaint in which it referred to receiving a disrepair claim in March 2021 and all the works being successfully completed in June 2023. The landlord went on to say that it had further reviewed the compensation it had previously offered and had increased this to £950, inclusive of the £50 previously offered. This was made up of:
1. £350 for the complaint handling failures the resident had experienced.
2. £100 for customer effort.
3. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
4. £250 for the delays completing the repairs.
The landlord also said that:
1. It had failed to recognise the difficulties the resident had experienced with its complaints process, it took too long to respond to her complaint at both Stage 1 and 2 and that it failed to capture the full story. The landlord went on to explain that ‘‘due to the sensitivity of the information relating to your complaint after legal proceedings had been initiated, our complaint responses also failed to fully address what had taken place up until the point of your disrepair claim being received’’.
2. It should have done more to turn things around, such as raising works and seeing them through, taking more time to support and empathise with her situation, escalating matters to ensure action was taken and to have considered compensation much sooner.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s decision not to respond to the resident’s concerns about disrepair to her property through its complaints policy.

It is evident that, at least as early as 12 January 2021, the resident had been raising concerns about repairs to her property. Following an initial complaint made to the landlord on 26 January 2021, which was not progressed, there is no evidence of the resident raising any further complaints with the landlord until 7 December 2021, by which time her solicitor had issued the landlord with a Pre Action Protocol letter. This was issued on 12 March 2021.
Even when a landlord receives correspondence initiating the Protocol, it is important that they do not disengage from either the complaints process or the repair issue itself. Commencing the Protocol does not constitute legal proceedings and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) can be pursued at any stage within the Protocol. In this case legal proceedings did not commence until after the landlord’s final response of 6 July 2022.
As that was the case, it was neither fair nor reasonable for the landlord to fail to address the resident’s concerns about disrepair to her property in either its stage 1 or stage 2 response. It was also neither fair nor reasonable for it to repeatedly say that as the resident had a legal disrepair claim, any progress with the repairs going forward would need to be discussed with her solicitor.
In such circumstances, where the landlord has been put on notice of repairs required to the property, the Ombudsman expects landlords to fully and fairly investigate the issues, take appropriate and reasonable steps to undertake and address repairs, and communicate this effectively with the resident.
However, with the exception of saying that the resident’s feedback about the contractors had been passed on so that this could be addressed, the landlord failed to provide the resident with any meaningful response to her complaint.
It is acknowledged that on 17 October 2023, the landlord recognised its failure to turn things around, such as raising works and seeing them through, taking more time to support and empathise with the resident’s situation, escalating matters to ensure action was taken and considering compensation much sooner. It was also welcome that it offered the resident £600 compensation, made up of £100 for customer effort, £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused and £250 for the delays completing the repairs, which was proportionate to the level of failings considered in this report.
However, that it did not do so during the complaints process, and that it did not provide the resident with any meaningful acknowledgment nor redress for some 15 months after the date of its final response, represents maladministration in this case for which a further £200 compensation has been ordered. This brings the total payable for this element of the complaint to £800.

Delays in the landlord providing the resident with its responses to her complaint.

The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. The complaints policy states that the landlord will aim to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
On 26 January 2021, the resident logged her initial formal complaint with the landlord about a number of repairs to her property. On 4 March 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint, apologised that the level of service had fallen below that expected and confirmed that a stage 1 complaint had been raised. There is no evidence of this complaint being escalated, the landlord stating that that the resident had not responded to the resolution officer at that time as she had said that her solicitor had told her they would resolve the matters.
As this has not been disputed by the resident, and as there is no evidence of the resident contacting it to complain about the service she had received until 7 December 2021, it was reasonable for the landlord to not progress this initial complaint or to consider this complaint in its response to the resident’s later complaint.
In accordance with the timescales set out in its complaints policy, the landlord should have responded to the resident’s complaint about the service she had received by 21 December 2021, within 10 working days of her contact with the landlord on 7 December 2021.
However, and despite the resident logging complaints on at least 4 further occasions between 7 December 2021 and 4 January 2022, the landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s complaint until 20 January 2022. This was also despite the landlord being contacted on at least 2 occasions by this Service during that time, asking that it provide the resident with its response.
The landlord then failed to provide its stage 1 response until 17 March 2022, almost 3 months outside of the timescales given in its complaints policy.
In that response, the landlord acknowledged that there had been a delay in its response for which it offered £50 compensation. The landlord also provided the resident with an explanation for the delays, referring to its team experiencing unexpected staff shortages that had impacted its usual delivery times. To address this, the landlord said that it was undertaking a number of actions to ensure it responded quicker but did not explain what these actions were.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 26 May 2022 and said that it would provide its full reply and decision by 27 June 2022, in accordance with the timescales set out in its complaints policy.
However, on 27 June 2022, the landlord wrote to the resident to advise that it would need more time to check the details of her complaint and that it would provide her with a full response by 11 July 2022. The landlord’s complaints policy states that in exceptional circumstances it may take up to a further 10 working days to conclude the review and give a date for the decision. In this case, the new deadline given was in accordance with the 10 working days, with the final response being issued within this deadline on 6 July 2022.
However, the landlord’s complaints policy also states that it will tell the resident as soon as possible of any such delay and, as such, advising the resident on the day its response was due was neither fair nor reasonable. This is because it would be reasonable to expect the landlord to have been aware that it needed more time to check the details much earlier that the day its response was due.
It is again acknowledged that on 17 October 2023, the landlord recognised its failings with regards to its complaint handling and increased the compensation offered from £50 to £350. However, as it did not do so during the complaints process, and did then not provide an appropriate level of compensation until some 15 months after the date of its final response, a finding of maladministration has been made. The landlord has also been ordered to pay the resident a further £100 compensation, bringing the total payable for this element of the complaint to £450.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its decision not to respond to the resident’s concerns about disrepair to her property through its complaints policy.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of the delays in it providing the resident with its responses to her complaint.

Reasons

Given that legal proceedings did not commence until after the landlord’s final response of 6 July 2022, it was neither fair nor reasonable for the landlord to fail to address the resident’s concerns about disrepair to her property in either its stage 1 or stage 2 response. It was also neither fair nor reasonable for it to repeatedly say that as the resident had a legal disrepair claim, any progress with the repairs going forward would need to be discussed with her solicitor. Whilst the landlord later acknowledged these failures and offered additional compensation, that it did not do so until some 15 months after the date of its final response represents maladministration in this case.
There were unreasonable delays in the landlord providing both its stage 1 and stage 2 responses. The stage 1 response was not issued until almost 3 months outside of the timescales set out in its complaints policy. With regards to its stage 2 response, whilst the landlord’s complaints policy allows it to extend the timescales by 10 working days, it failed to advise the resident of this within a reasonable period of time, only doing so on the day the response was due. Whilst the landlord later acknowledged these failures and offered additional compensation, that it did not do so until some 15 months after the date of its final response again represents maladministration in this case.

Orders

Within 28 calendar days of the date of this report, the landlord is to:
1. Pay the resident a total of £1,250 compensation, made up of:
  1. £800 for its failures in relation to its decision not to respond to the resident’s concerns about disrepair to her property through its complaints policy. This is inclusive of the £600 compensation offered in its response of 17 October 2023, if this has not already been paid.
  2. £450 for the delays in it providing the resident with its responses to her complaint. This is inclusive of the £350 compensation offered in its response of 17 October 2023, if this has not already been paid.
2. To carry out a review of its complaints handling in this case. Once completed, the landlord is to provide this Service and the resident with the outcome of that review and details of what actions it intends to take to ensure that its staff respond to formal complaints in accordance with both its own policy and this Service’s Guidance on Pre-action Protocol for Housing Conditions Claims & Service Complaints.
3. Confirm that it has complied with the above orders.