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

Abri Group Limited (202428388)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202428388

Abri Group Limited

3 June 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 concerns about the quality of fence repairs

Background

  1. The resident’s assured tenancy began on 24 March 2014. The property is a 1-bedroom bungalow. The resident is the sole occupant in the property. He is registered as having dementia and other physical health conditions.
  2. The resident raised an issue with rats entering his garden from beneath the boundary fence to his neighbour’s property on 26 March 2024. Following an inspection by the landlord, it was recommended that 1 fence panel and 1 gravel board be replaced. The work was completed on 13 June 2024 in line with the resident’s request.
  3. Following the completion of the work, the resident raised concerns regarding gaps being present between the new fencing and the ground. As such, an additional survey was conducted before he logged a complaint on 19 June 2024.
  4. The landlord acknowledged the stage 1 complaint on 21 June 2024. It also requested an extension on 2 July 2024 to allow for its Independent Living Officer to visit and discuss the repair with the resident.
  5. The landlord provided the stage 1 response on 17 July 2024 and did not uphold the complaint. The landlord said three operatives had inspected and found the work adequate.
  6. The resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint on 22 July 2024 as he remained unhappy and felt the fence could be more adequately rat proofed.
  7. The landlord acknowledged this request on 23 July 2024, with an extension being requested on 16 August 2024. Its final response was issued on 16 September 2024. This escalation was not upheld as surveys confirmed the work was of a satisfactory standard.
  8. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s responses as he saw rats entering his garden from beneath the replaced fence panel, and on one occasion a rat entered his bungalow. The complaint was escalated to the Ombudsman on 23 October 2024.

Assessment and findings

Policy and Procedures

  1. The landlord’s customer relations procedure commits to responding to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of being acknowledged, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the complaint being acknowledged, where possible.
  2. If the landlord requires more time to complete an investigation due to the complexity of the case, it will contact the resident to confirm this and provide an explanation. Stage 1 complaints can be extended to 20 working days from the date of acknowledgement and stage 2 complaints can be extended to 40 working days from the date of acknowledgement.
  3. The landlord says that it wants its residents to have confidence that it listens, learns and take prompt action to put matters right. It strives to provide a fair and effective resolution to any complaint and use learnings to drive service improvements across its business.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the quality of fence repairs.

  1. It is not disputed by the landlord that it is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the garden fencing, or that the work undertaken was required due to the condition of the original fencing.
  2. After the resident reported rodents entering the garden, the landlord arranged a survey on 9 April 2024, where it concluded 1 fence panel and 1 gravel board would be replaced.
  3. The landlord first offered an appointment on 13 April 2024. At the resident’s request, a date of 13 June 2024 was agreed. An initial appointment was offered within 48 hours of the work being identified. The final date of 13 June 2024 was selected by the resident in order to correspond with other works. This approach by the landlord was customer centric – as such, there was no service failure.
  4. On 14 June 2024 the resident contacted the landlord to advise he was unhappy with the gaps that were left at the bottom of the new gravel board. He felt rats could still access his garden through these. In response, the landlord raised an inspection for 19 June 2024. This was a prompt and reasonable response.
  5. The inspection was conducted by its Customer Response Supervisor. They noted at the visit that the work was completed to a good standard and the fence was structurally sound. Photographs were taken and a discussion was held with the resident to try and alleviate any concerns. The inspector deemed no further work would be necessary.
  6. Our view is that the landlord demonstrated its complaint values to listen and take prompt action. It considered the resident’s concerns and acted on them within 5 days to check the work was completed to a good standard. It discussed its decision not to undertake any further works with the resident.
  7. The resident remained unhappy with the gaps and subsequently raised a complaint. Following a visit from an independent living partner on 10 July 2024, the landlord highlighted to the resident that the gaps were present due to the slope of the garden, but were of a size that would not allow a rat to pass through. A visual inspection of the area concluded that no animal had attempted to burrow under the gravel board. It advised the resident during the first survey that rats can climb and chew through surfaces so it was not possible to completely proof the garden against them.
  8. The stage 1 response issued on 17 July 2024 did not uphold the resident’s complaint. This was because 2 separate inspections found no evidence of rats attempting to burrow under the fence and confirmed the work was completed to a good standard.
  9. The landlord has addressed the resident’s concerns and requested a second opinion on the quality of the workmanship. The time between the 2 inspections also allowed for any rodent issue to be visible around the areas of concern. It is the Ombudsman’s stance that the landlord took the resident’s concerns seriously and managed his complaint in line with its complaint policy. As such, we find no service failure.
  10. A stage 2 escalation was requested as the resident remained unhappy with the quality of the work. The landlord’s response noted a discussion with the resident to help them better understand the situation. Following the resident’s confirmation that he required his garden to be rat proofed, the landlord referred to its repair log for previous reports of rats. Records show the last incident was recorded in May 2023 with the cause identified as a manhole cover that had been replaced and no further reports had been received.
  11. The resident remained dissatisfied and referred his complaint to this Service. He stated that rats are now entering the garden, and his property, via the gaps in the fence. It is acknowledged by this Service that upon notifying the landlord of our investigation, it did an additional survey on 14 March 2025 to again inspect but also to reassure the resident the repair was sufficient.
  12. As highlighted in the initial survey, the landlord identified that it is not possible to entirely rat proof a garden, noting the ability of rats to dig, climb and chew. This highlights that regardless of any adjustments made to the fence, the landlord would unlikely be able to entirely prevent rats. It is however the landlord’s responsibility to ensure residents are aware of its pest control policies – a recommendation is made below.
  13. The landlord appropriately relied on the advice and guidance provided by its operatives and supervisors. Although the resident questioned the quality of the workmanship, the landlord’s records and images show it was reasonable to determine that the works were carried out satisfactorily given the constraints of the slope of the garden.
  14. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of this situation. It demonstrated throughout the process that it listened to the resident and took appropriate action to try and resolve his concerns.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the quality of fence repairs.

Recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should provide the resident with a copy of its pest policy.