A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202216861)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202216861

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

11 September 2024

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 repairs to the resident’s bedroom window.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident lives in a 3-bedroom flat located on the first floor. She holds an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association. At the time of the complaint the resident was pregnant and lived with her partner and 4 children.
On 6 April 2022 the resident reported that her bedroom window could not be locked and was insecure. The landlord arranged an appointment for an operative to attend on 12 April 2022.
The operative inspected the window and advised that a specialist contractor would need to attend. The landlord arranged for a contractor to attend the property on 16 May 2022, but this was rescheduled to 1 June 2022.
The contractor attended and discovered the window was in imminent danger of failing completely. The contractor prevented the window from falling to the pavement and the fire service was called to make the window safe. The contractor told the resident that they would need to wait for parts before the window could be fully repaired.
The resident raised her formal complaint on 1 June 2022 due to the delay in fixing the window. The landlord responded on 9 June 2022, apologised for the delay, and offered £75 in compensation. It also told the resident that the ongoing delay to the repair was due to the parts not being freely available.
The landlord, the contractor and the resident exchanged further communication between 5 July 2022 and 19 October 2022. The contractor attended the resident’s property on 19 October 2022 and completed a full repair of the bedroom window.
Between the same period, the resident asked to escalate her complaint on:
1. 5 and 13 July 2022.
2. 8 August 2022.
3. 4, 17, 25 and 26 October 2022.
This Service contacted the landlord, and a stage 2 complaint response was issued to the resident on 20 April 2023. The landlord’s stage 2 response said:
1. It was sorry for the delayed complaint response.
2. The compensation at stage 1 was not enough.
3. It would like to offer £450 in compensation broken down as:
  1. £150 for time and trouble due to the delays in repair.
  2. £100 for distress and inconvenience.
  3. £100 for its poor communication.
  4. £100 for its delayed complaint response.
4. It would not make a payment for the resident’s heating costs, or for the impact on her pregnancy, as the resident had not supplied evidence of this loss.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

It is understood that the resident has concerns about a new repair to another window within her property. However, in the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction prior to the involvement of this Service. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord through its complaint procedure if required.

Repairs to the bedroom window

The landlord’s responsive repairs policy at the time said that they would complete urgent repairs within 24 hours, and they would make an appointment for standard repairs using the next available appointment at the resident’s convenience.
The landlord took positive initial action in line with its repairs policy by quickly arranging an appointment for an operative to attend within 5 working days after the resident reported an issue with her window.
Following the initial appointment on 12 April 2022, the landlord arranged for a contractor to attend on 16 May 2022, but rescheduled it to 1 June 2022. The landlord has not provided evidence that it told the about the rescheduling. The landlord confirmed the new appointment only after the resident contacted it for an update. This did not follow the landlord’s repair policy which says that it would ensure residents are advised of changes or delays to appointments at the earliest opportunity.
In addition, there is a lack of any evidence the landlord conducted a risk assessment which considered the resident’s individual circumstances. The resident, who lived with young children at the time, was left vulnerable and unable to use her bedroom due to the 34 working days delay between the landlord’s initial attendance and the contractor’s visit. This failure to conduct a tailored risk assessment overlooked potential health and safety concerns.
The contractor attended on 1 June 2022 and recognised that the window was unsafe and in danger of falling to the pavement below. This further indicates that the landlord did not conduct a thorough risk assessment to ensure appropriate actions were taken to make the window safe. This incident left the resident fearful for her and her children’s safety and caused further distress.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response acknowledged the distress the incident on 1 June 2022 caused the resident. It was positive that the landlord recognised the resident’s distress, however the language used could have been more empathetic and recognised the health and safety aspect of its failings.
Between 6 July 2022 and 4 October 2022, the resident contacted the landlord for an update 5 times. The landlord responded to each of these requests and provided a total of 12 updates throughout this period. This shows a good level of communication with the resident and that the landlord was proactive in providing updates and responding to the resident’s requests.
The landlord did provide the resident a fan in July 2022 to try and help with the heat during a particularly hot summer. This was a positive action and shows the landlord made some effort to try and mitigate the impact on the resident of being unable to open the window during a period of extreme heat.
However, the resident waited a total of 130 working days for her bedroom window to be repaired. The landlord told the resident that the delay was due to the contractor being unable to source the window parts. While the Ombudsman appreciates the difficulty in managing repairs requiring parts from third parties, the landlord could have made efforts to source parts from a different contractor or third party. This consideration was important, especially given the resident’s circumstances of living with young children, being pregnant, and being unable to use the bedroom due to ventilation and heat issues.
The Ombudsman has considered whether the landlord’s offer of compensation in its stage 2 complaint response was reasonable redress. However, in the circumstances the offer made does not account for the full impact to the resident. Therefore, in all the circumstances of the case the landlord’s actions amount to maladministration.
As part of its stage 2 complaint response the landlord apologised for its actions and offered the resident a total of £350 compensation, broken down as:
1. £150 for time and trouble due to the delays in repair.
2. £100 for distress and inconvenience.
3. £100 for its poor communication.
The landlord did not have a specific compensation policy in relation to discretionary payments at the time. This Service’s guidance on remedies says that payments of between £100 to £600 are for where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident but has no permanent impact.
The evidence shows that the delay in repairing the window significantly distressed, upset and worried the resident. However, the landlord completed the window repair, allowing the resident to fully use her bedroom window again. Therefore, there is no permanent impact on the resident. While it is positive that the landlord offered compensation to acknowledge the impact to the resident, the Ombudsman does not consider the amounts for time and trouble, or distress and inconvenience are proportionate to the failings. Given the length of time taken to complete the repair a fair compensation amount would be £300 for the delay to repair and £200 for the distress and inconvenience, this is in addition to the £100 offered for poor communication.
There is an impact to the resident that the landlord’s offer of compensation does not cover. The resident explained to the landlord that she was unable to use her bedroom for sustained periods due to poor ventilation and the heat. She also advised that her electricity bill would likely be higher than normal due to using the fan provided by the landlord to try and mitigate the impact to her.
The landlord told the resident in its complaint response that it would not make a payment for these costs due to not having evidence of the potential financial loss. The resident responded by saying that it would be unfair to compare an electricity bill from 2021 to 2022 as there were increased costs of electricity during COVID-19 due to her family staying at home.
Where there has been a financial loss that is not quantifiable the Ombudsman may say that the landlord should pay an amount in recognition of the fact that the resident, on the balance of probabilities, incurred costs that would not have arisen had the failing not occurred. In the circumstances of this case, it is fair to say that the resident likely had an increase in costs due to using the electric fan for around 4 months. The landlord is ordered to pay compensation of £50 in addition to the £600 to cover the resident’s likely financial loss. The total compensation of £650 (inclusive of the £350 already offered) is broken down as:
1. £300 for time and trouble due to the delays in repair.
2. £200 for distress and inconvenience.
3. £100 for its poor communication.
4. £50 for additional electric costs.

Complaint handling

The landlord operates a 2-stage complaint policy. Stage 1 responses are due within 10 working days of complaint acknowledgment, and stage 2 responses are due within 20 working days. If the landlord cannot respond within these timescales, it will contact the resident, agree on an extension, and provide regular updates.
The landlord dealt with the resident’s complaint at stage 1 effectively and in line with its policy timescales. It provided a response after 5 working days and fully addressed the resident’s complaint.
The resident requested escalation of her complaint 7 times between 5 July 2022 and 26 October 2022. However, the landlord failed to provide a stage 2 response until 20 April 2023 despite evidence to show it received the resident’s escalation requests. In total the delay was 201 working days, and the landlord only provided a response after this Service’s intervention. This was an unreasonable delay and caused the resident some frustration and distress.
In its stage 2 response the landlord apologised and explained that the delay in was due to a caseworker failing to manage the complaint. It offered the resident £100 for the delay in handling the complaint. The Ombudsman has considered if this offer amounts to reasonable redress but given the length of the delay and the time and trouble taken by the resident to chase the landlord the offer is not proportionate to the failings identified. Taking all the circumstances into account, the failings amount to maladministration.
This Service’s guidance says that payments of between £100 to £600 are for where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident but has no permanent impact. While the landlord did offer £100 the impact to the resident warrants a higher payment within this bracket. Therefore, the Ombudsman orders a payment of £250 in compensation.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
1. Repairs to the resident’s bedroom window.
2. The associated complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Write to the resident and apologise for the failures identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident £900 compensation (inclusive of the £450 already offered), broken down as:
  1. £300 for time and trouble due to the delays in repair.
  2. £250 for the delayed complaint handling.
  3. £200 for distress and inconvenience.
  4. £100 for its poor communication.
  5. £50 for additional electric costs
Within 12 weeks of the date of this report and under paragraph 54.g. of the Scheme, the landlord is ordered to conduct a review of the learning from this case. It is to provide the Ombudsman with a summary of the actions it will take to address the issues identified in this report, these include:
1. How it will ensure it undertakes a risk assessment where appropriate based on the individual circumstances of the household when responding to reports of window disrepair or fault.
2. How it will ensure appropriate expertise for window related complaints, including independent surveyors, are engaged and that the landlord’s actions in response to recommendations are reasonable, clear, and consistent.
3. What training or policy changes it should consider making with reference to the Ombudsman’s centre for learning on window related complaints, available on this Service’s website. (Window guidance | Housing Ombudsman (housing-ombudsman.org.uk)