Abri Group Limited (202322589)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202322589
Abri Group Limited
20 August 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 the resident’s query about when her windows would be replaced.
- This Service will also investigate the landlord’s complaint handling.
Background
- The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord since 1992. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The landlord is a housing association.
- In January and early February 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to ask for information about window replacement at her property. The landlord did not respond to the requests. In late February 2023 the resident contacted the landlord again. It told the resident it would replace the windows during 2023. In June 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to ask approximately when the window replacement would take place, but she did not receive a response from the landlord.
- In late June 2023 she raised a stage 1 complaint about the landlord’s lack of communication. It apologised and offered a shopping voucher.
- In August 2023 the landlord surveyed the windows of the property. It informed her that the windows were in good working order and did not need to be replaced. The resident was dissatisfied and requested her complaint be escalated to stage 2 of the complaints process.
- In September 2023, the landlord provided its stage 2 response. It apologised she had been told the windows would be replaced. It said it should have explained that its decision about replacing the windows was based on the condition of the windows and not on their age. It confirmed its compensation offer made in its stage 1 response and did not uphold the complaint.
- In February 2024, the resident escalated her complaint to this Service. Her position was the landlord had made a verbal contract to replace the windows so it should honour this. This Service contacted the landlord to inform it of the resident’s complaint. It carried out a review of the case.
- On 27 February 2024 it told the resident it would replace the windows in April 2024. It reconsidered its stage 1 complaint response and offered £150 in recognition of the failed call backs between January and December 2023. It also offered £100 because it had not contacted her to discuss the complaint when she escalated it to stage 2.
- In March 2024 the parties spoke again about the issues. The landlord said that it had a further review of its communications with her. It acknowledged her sentiment that the matter was not about seeking compensation, but that she was disappointed and dissatisfied because it had not kept to its word. It offered a further £100 as gesture of goodwill and said it was committed to rebuilding its relationship with her. The windows were replaced in April 2024.
Assessment and findings
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s query about when her windows would be replaced.
- The landlord has a customer service policy. This states it will respond to all call back requests within 5 working days.
- In this case the evidence shows that between January and June 2023, there were 3 occasions were the resident was told she would receive a call back but did not. This caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.
- In its complaint response the landlord said it was unable to offer an explanation as to why she had not received a call back. This is concerning and suggests a lack of oversight and monitoring of call backs. It said it would remind its internal department that it must respond to call back requests within policy timescales. This was appropriate.
- On 23 February 2023 the resident telephoned the landlord to inform it the windows were 30 years old and asked when they would be replaced. It informed her that her windows would be replaced in 2023. However, it failed to explain that the decision to replace the windows was not based on the age of the windows alone but would be based on a technical survey to assess the overall condition and working order of the windows. The landlord provided incomplete information about the process which raised the resident’s expectations. This was unfair.
- In June 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to find out approximately when the window replacement would take place. She was told the team dealing with the issue would contact her, however, she was not contacted. This was the third time the landlord did not respond to her requests for information. This was poor customer service. The landlord has not provided any mitigating circumstances or explanation for why this happened. The situation caused inconvenience and distress to the resident. Consequently, on 23 June 2024 she made a stage 1 complaint about the landlord’s lack of communication.
- The landlord provided its complaint response just over 4 weeks later on 24 July 2024. (The landlord’s complaint handling has been investigated later in this report). In its response it accepted it had failed to call her back on a number of occasions between January and June 2023. It apologised and offered a £25 shopping voucher. It also acknowledged it had not dealt with her complaint in a timely manner and offered £50 in recognition of this. It arranged to visit the following week to carry out a survey of the windows. This Service has considered the £25 shopping voucher offered and does not think it reflects the extent of the failures or the detriment caused.
- After the survey of the windows the resident remained dissatisfied because she was told the windows would not be replaced. She escalated her complaint to stage 2. In its response it said it was sorry that it had not told her the timeframe she had previously been given was an estimate, and that the replacement of the windows was subject to a condition survey. It said it upheld its stage 1 decision.
- This Service finds that between January 2023 and June 2023 there were repeat service failures when the landlord failed to call the resident back to provide information she had asked for. When it did speak to her, it provided incomplete information about its window renewal process which raised the resident’s expectations and caused her to experience disappointment when she was later informed the windows would not be replaced. The situation caused inconvenience, distress and caused her to complain. This Service finds there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s query about when the windows would be replaced.
- In 2024 the landlord reviewed the complaint. This was after the complaint had been brought to this Service. It agreed to replace the windows and offered additional compensation of £150 for failing to call her back between January and December 2023. This amount is in line with the amount set out in its compensation matrix where the resident has experienced repeat service failures and unreasonable inconvenience. The landlord should have offered this amount within its complaint process. This Service would then have been able to make a finding of reasonable redress.
- In March 2024, it carried out a further review of her case and offered a further £100 as a goodwill gesture. The total amount of compensation received by the resident amounts to £250 and £25 shopping voucher. It also replaced the windows in April 2024.
- While this Service has made a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the matter, this Service can see the that after its complaint process it did address the failings and the redress offered was appropriate. The landlord has apologised for the issues and has taken steps to rebuild the landlord tenant relationship. It has also demonstrated learning from the complaint as evidenced by its senior stakeholder review. Therefore, no further compensation or apology is ordered.
The landlord’s complaint handling
- The landlord’s complaints policy states it commits to responding to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
- It also states that at stage 2 ‘the dedicated reviewer will seek to telephone the customer to set out their understanding of the complaint and the outcomes the resident is seeking’.
- In this case the resident first complained on 23 June 2023. This means the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was due no later than 7 July 2023. On 18 July 2023, it sent a holding reply stating it would send a full response as soon as possible. This timescale was too vague. The Complaint Handling Code applicable at the time states landlords ‘…must provide a clear timeframe for when the response will be received.’ This Service also finds the holding reply was not provided in a timely manner. It should have been provided before the complaint response was due, not when the complaint was already past its due date. The landlord provided its complaint response on 24 July 2023. This was 12 days past its due date. This was inappropriate.
- In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord acknowledged its complaint response was late. It explained it was dealing with a high volume of cases. It offered £50 shopping voucher. This was appropriate and in line with the compensation matrix contained in its ‘putting things right’ policy. In relation to its stage 2 response, it provided this within timescale.
- As part of its post–complaint review in February 2024, the landlord spoke to the resident. She expressed dissatisfaction that she had not been contacted by the landlord to discuss the stage 2 complaint as set out in its complaint procedure. It was appropriate to include this matter in its review of the original complaint. The landlord apologised and offered £100 goodwill gesture. It also offered £150 for the failed call backs between January and June 2023. These amounts were appropriate.
- While it is positive the landlord continued to review the circumstances of the case after it was escalated to this Service, this Services’ view is that it should have identified the issues and made its compensation offers at the appropriate stage of its complaints process. The Complaint Handling Code states ‘complaints should always be resolved at the earliest opportunity.’ Had it made its compensation offer and goodwill gesture within the complaints process this Service would have considered the landlord had put things right and made a finding of reasonable redress.
- Additionally, when compensation offers come after the complaints process is exhausted, it is harder for the landlord to demonstrate it will act fairly and consistently in all cases. In this case senior stakeholders reviewed the complaint 5 months after the complaints process was exhausted. As a result of the senior stakeholders review the resident was awarded an additional £100 goodwill gesture. The landlord’s complaints policy and procedure does not refer to a senior stakeholder review process so is not clear how the landlord decides which complaints will undergo a stakeholder review.
- As previously stated, it is positive the landlord continues to analyse complaints to identify learning. However, the landlord must be mindful that additional reviews do not lead to unfairness or inconsistency in its compensation awards when compared to a complaint that does not undergo an additional review.
- This Service finds there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling because it did not make its compensation offers at the appropriate stage of the complaints process. A review of the landlord’s complaint correspondence with the resident shows it understood where things went wrong, and it has demonstrated learning from the complaint. It has apologised for the issues and has taken steps to rebuild the landlord tenant relationship Therefore, no further apology or compensation is ordered.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s query about when her windows would be replaced.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
Recommendation
- When a complaint is escalated to stage 2 the landlord should ensure it telephones the resident to set out their understanding of the complaint and the outcomes the resident is seeking.