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

Basildon Borough Council (202315108)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202315108

Basildon Borough Council

26 March 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 handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the roof and balcony.
  2. The landlord’s complaint handling has also been considered.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The property is a 2-bedroom maisonette with a balcony and is part of a block of 4 properties. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident; however, the resident has reported that his wife is disabled.
  2. The first recording of the resident’s reports of missing roof tiles and broken tiles on the balcony was on 13 June 2022. The landlord noted the repair as a routine priority. The resident contacted the landlord again on 25 August 2022 to advise that the repairs were outstanding. The landlord noted that scaffolding would be needed to inspect the roof.
  3. The resident’s stage 1 complaint has not been provided, but the landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response on 31 August 2022. It stated that it had no record of reports of tiles missing. An appointment was scheduled for 12 September 2022 to inspect the tiles.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on 18 November 2022 to complain that he had still not received contact about the tiles. The resident stated that the landlord had attended on 24 June 2022, but this had not been followed up. The landlord responded on 29 November 2022. It advised that it did not consider that the resident had previously complained about the tiles. It also noted that it had attended on 12 September 2022, but scaffolding had not been erected, so an inspection of the roof tiles could not take place. The landlord stated it tried to attend again on 29 November 2022, but no access was granted.
  5. The resident contacted the landlord on 13 December 2022 to ask when he would receive a further response to his complaint. The landlord responded that it had not received an escalation request from the resident after its 29 November 2022 email. It also told the resident he would need to rebook an inspection as no access was granted.
  6. On 3 January 2023, the resident expressed frustration that he did not know what the missed appointment on 29 November 2022 was for and that he had received a message from the landlord about a cancellation for the present day. The resident asked the landlord to contact him before making appointments.
  7. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on or before 6 July 2023. The landlord’s internal correspondence mentions that there were 2 roof tiles missing and that scaffolding was required. The landlord’s subsequent stage 2 response is undated, but it has clarified to this Service that it sent the response on 27 July 2023. The landlord stated that roofers had tried to attend on 5 July 2023 but could not complete the work because there was no scaffolding. It advised it would reattend within 28 days.
  8. The resident contacted this Service on 23 August 2023 because he was unhappy that the repair works had not been completed. The resident requested compensation for the delays and inconvenience caused.
  9. The resident wrote to the landlord again on 18 October 2023. The resident noted that he was frustrated because the landlord had attended on several occasions, but no works had been carried out.
  10. The landlord provided a further stage 1 response on 20 November 2023. The resident’s associated complaint has not been provided to this Service. In this further response, the landlord apologised to the resident for a missed appointment and offered £20 compensation for this.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the roof and balcony

  1. The landlord’s tenancy handbook confirms its responsibility to maintain the roof structure and coverings. It does not mention who is responsible for repairs to the balcony floor tiles. However, based on the communication between the parties, the landlord appears to have accepted ownership of the repairs to the balcony floor tiles. The handbook states that all repairs that are not high priority should be completed within 28 days.
  2. The resident’s complaint is that the repairs to the tiles on his roof and balcony remain outstanding. The landlord’s records show it was on notice about these repairs from 13 June 2022. At the time of this report, the repairs have not been completed. This is outside of the timeframe provided in the landlord’s policies which is a failing.
  3. The landlord has attended on at least 5 occasions to assess the repairs. The landlord has accepted that it does not have a record of some of the visits reported by the resident. This Service recognises that it can take several visits to complete a repair and that this would not necessarily indicate a failure by the landlord. In these situations, we would expect to see that the landlord has kept the resident updated with its progress and the reasons for any delays so that the resident’s expectations can be managed.
  4. The landlord did not provide updates to the resident following its visits or outline what work it intended to carry out. The resident reported that he contacted the landlord to ask when it would complete the repair but did not receive a clear response. The resident has been inconvenienced by not knowing if or when the repair will be completed, or the reason for the delays.
  5. From the evidence provided, it appears that the landlord has experienced difficulties obtaining the tiles required for the repair. While this is outside of the landlord’s control, this information has not been passed to the resident and the landlord missed the opportunity to manage the resident’s expectations and provide assurance that it is taking the repair seriously. This was inappropriate and caused further inconvenience to the resident.
  6. The resident reported that the landlord made appointments without arranging this with him first, and did not always turn up when it said it would. On occasions, the landlord could not keep its appointment because it had not arranged scaffolding. This was unreasonable and caused inconvenience to the resident because he did not know when the landlord would be attending.
  7. Although the landlord’s records show the resident reported the repair in June 2022, it told the resident in August 2022 that it had no record of any missing tiles in the block. In November 2022, it stated that it did not consider that the resident had previously complained about the missing tiles despite a complaint response being sent in August 2022. This demonstrates a significant record keeping failure by the landlord. The landlord’s failure to provide clear and correct information was unreasonable and caused distress to the resident.
  8. Despite the works remaining incomplete, it is not clear what steps the landlord intends to take to ensure the roof and balcony are repaired or what the timeline for this is. It is also not clear whether the landlord intends to continue trying to source the tiles or take an alternative approach. This Service cannot comment on what repairs would be appropriate because the landlord is entitled to rely on its qualified staff to make this decision. However, it is expected that the outcome of any inspections should be shared with the resident and an indicative timeframe be provided, which it has not done.
  9. In its complaint responses, the landlord did not acknowledge the inconvenience caused to the resident by the delays. While it apologised for a missed appointment, it was vague about when it would reattend which was inappropriate.
  10. In summary, given the failures identified above, the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs to the roof and balcony amounts to maladministration. The landlord failed to communicate clearly with the resident and was not proactive in its approach to the repair. It is recognised that the availability of the tiles is outside of the landlord’s control; however, the landlord has not provided any assurances of when the work will be completed, or that it is taking the resident’s concerns seriously. There is no evidence of reflection or learning from the landlord so that it can improve its service.
  11. In light of the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident, the Ombudsman awards £300 compensation for the failures noted in this report. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where the landlord has failed to acknowledge its failings and has made no attempt to put things right.
  12. The Ombudsman would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts and repairs, yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.

Complaint handling

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states that landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents.
  2. The landlord’s complaint handling policy which was in place at the time of the resident’s complaint does not set out its response time frames for complaints.
  3. The Code in place at the time of the resident’s complaint states that stage 1 complaints must be responded to within 10 working days. Stage 2 complaints must be responded to within 20 working days.
  4. The landlord did not keep an accurate record of the specific date the first complaint was made and has not provided details of what it considers to be the resident’s first complaint, which is a failing. It also has not provided details of the resident’s request for the complaint to be escalated. This is a record keeping failure by the landlord. Record keeping is a core function of effective complaint management, not only so that a landlord can provide information to the Service when requested, but also because this assists the landlord in providing good complaint responses.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 31 August 2022. Because the landlord has not provided the resident’s initial complaint, it is not possible to assess whether it met the response timeframes set out in the Code. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response was undated which was also a failing. It has since outlined to this Service that it believes this was sent to the resident on 27 July 2023; however, given that it is unclear as to when the complaint was escalated, it is once again not possible to assess whether it met the response timeframes set out in the Code.
  6. The landlord provided a further stage 1 response on 20 November 2023. It is unclear what this was in response to as the related stage 1 complaint has not been provided to this Service. This is a further failing of the landlord’s record keeping.
  7. The complaint responses did not always set out the landlord’s understanding of the complaint or what the resident was seeking which was inappropriate as the Code requires that it do so. The landlord’s stage 2 response also stated that the landlord is sorry that the resident felt the need to complain. This is not considered to be an apology for service failure and was dismissive of the resident’s concerns. 
  8. The complaint response sent on 20 November 2023 focused on the resident’s obligations to allow access for repairs because the resident had asked for an appointment after 4pm due to work commitments. In this response, the landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns and demonstrate it understood the reasons for his complaint, which was inappropriate.
  9. Given the above failings, the landlord’s complaint handling amounted to maladministration. Its responses did not meet the Code because they did not set out what the complaint was about or what the resident was seeking. The responses did not fully address the resident’s concerns and did not offer any sympathy for the resident’s experience. The landlord’s record keeping has also meant it has not been possible to assess whether it met the timeframes set out in the Code.
  10. To reflect the distress and inconvenience this caused to the resident, the Ombudsman awards £100 compensation to the resident for the complaint handling failures outlined in this report. This is in line with our remedies guidance, which is available on our website.

Determination

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

Orders

  1. The landlord must apologise to the resident in writing for the failures noted in this determination. A copy should also be provided to the Ombudsman within 4 weeks of this determination.
  2. Within 4 weeks of this determination, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total compensation of £400. The compensation is broken down as follows:
    1. £300 to acknowledge and redress the failures identified in relation to the repairs to the roof and balcony.
    2. £100 in recognition of the complaint handling failures
  3. Within 6 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must write to the resident and set out its position on the repairs to the roof and balcony. The landlord must set out the timeframe for the repair and what works it intends to carry out. A copy of this should also be provided to the Ombudsman, also within 6 weeks.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should conduct a review of its record keeping processes, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for complaints, which provides details of specifically when contact was made, what was said and what the agreed next steps and expectations were. The landlord should also consider the recommendations made in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management.