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

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202323177)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202323177

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

11 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. This complaint is about how the landlord handled repairs to the resident’s front and back doors.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bed house.
  2. On 14 August 2023, the resident made a complaint. She said she had been chasing repairs to her doors for months without progress.
  3. The landlord sent a stage 1 response on 25 August 2023. It said it had completed all repairs to both doors, and there were no remaining works needed. The resident escalated her complaint on the same day. She said the landlord had inspected the door but completed no repairs, and she had been chasing the repairs for months.
  4. The landlord sent a stage 2 response on 27 September 2023. It said the doors were in good condition, so it would only repair them and not replace them. It accepted that its communication had been poor and offered £300 compensation.
  5. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response, so referred her complaint to us. She said she had ongoing issues with water ingress, the repairs had not worked, and she wanted the landlord to replace the doors.
  6. The landlord replaced the front door in March 2024. It has repaired but not replaced the back door.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The Housing Ombudsman Scheme says we may not investigate complaints which have not gone through the landlord’s complaints process. When referring her complaint to us, the resident said there were ongoing issues with the doors. Any events after the landlord’s stage 2 response have not gone through the landlord’s complaints process. This means while we may refer to those events for context, we will not consider the landlord’s actions after the stage 2 response as part of this investigation.

Door repairs

  1. The landlord is responsible under the tenancy agreement for repairs to the external doors. Its repair obligations start when it is put on notice of a repair issue, and it must complete repairs within a reasonable time. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will aim to complete standard repairs in 20 working days.
  2. The resident reported issues with the back door on 24 August 2022. She said it had dropped and become stiff. The landlord booked an appointment for 2 September 2022. This was within the timeframe set out in its repairs policy. Its operative said the door needed additional bolts and seals. They said they fixed the door.
  3. On 6 September 2022, the resident said the door had become hard to shut following the repair. She then reported issues with the front door on 26 September 2022. She said it was not closing properly, leading to draughts. The landlord’s records show it tried to complete repairs on 3 October 2022, but the resident did not provide access. It then re-booked the appointment for 6 October 2022. Its records show it attended that appointment and completed repairs.
  4. On each of the above occasions, the landlord carried out repairs within a reasonable time. We have seen no evidence of the resident raising any further repair issues with the doors until 10 March 2023.
  5. On 10 March 2023, the resident told the landlord there were gaps between both doors and their frames. She also said seals were missing from both doors. The landlord called the resident on 13 March 2023 to make an appointment. It left a voicemail. We have not seen evidence of any further attempts to contact her. She contacted the landlord on 28 March 2023, and its contractor booked an appointment in early April 2023. The contractors who attended said they eased and adjusted the door, and that the door was working as expected. 
  6. The resident contacted the landlord again on 28 June 2023. She said the contractor had inspected the glass, but had not done any works. The landlord sought further information from the contractor, which was reasonable. The contractor told the landlord that they had inspected the door and identified that the door worked as intended, with no gaps in the doors. They said the resident told them the doors were draughty and leaked, so provided a quote for replacement doors. The evidence provided from the contractor indicates that this was because of the resident’s request, rather than because new doors were needed.
  7. The landlord’s records show it had a surveyor review the inspection notes and photos of the doors. They said that new doors were not needed. While the landlord chose to replace the door in March 2024, that does not mean it acted unreasonably in the past.
  8. Based on the evidence provided, the landlord responded to the resident’s reports about problems with the doors within a reasonable timeframe. Its contractors confirmed that they had completed all necessary repairs, and that no replacement was needed. While the resident disputes that the repairs resolved the issues, the landlord is entitled to rely on the advice of its appropriately qualified contractors in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
  9. However, we would have expected the landlord to explain its position regarding the doors to the resident when she asked for updates in June 2023. We have seen no evidence to show the landlord did so before she made a complaint. The evidence shows it only responded because of the complaint. This was unreasonable and demonstrates poor communication.
  10. The landlord’s failings with regard to the door repairs are limited to poor communication. The landlord accepted those failings in its complaint response and offered compensation. As such, we have considered whether the landlord has done enough to put things right.
  11. The landlord offered a total of £300 compensation for its poor communication. It has provided evidence to show it has paid that compensation to the resident. This amount of compensation is in line with its compensation policy. It is also in line with our published remedies guidance for failings which have no permanent impact, but which adversely affect a resident. As such, we consider the landlord has done enough to put things right.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, the landlord has made a reasonable offer of redress for its handling of door repairs which resolves the complaint satisfactorily.