Accent Housing Limited (202305751)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202305751
Accent Housing Limited
21 November 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 windows and doors in the resident’s property.
- The Ombudsman has also considered the associated complaint handling.
Background
- The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord of a property that he has occupied since August 2021.
- In April 2022 the landlord wrote to the resident and notified him that his home had been chosen for its energy efficiency works programme, which would include fitting insulation and replacing windows and doors. The contractors that were conducting the works erected a temporary welfare and storage unit in the car park area.
- In January 2023 the landlord notified the resident that surveys had shown that the planned energy efficiency works were not suitable for his home. It said that it would continue to fit loft insulation.
- The resident raised a complaint on 6 March 2023. He stated that a surveyor was due to visit that day to inspect the windows however, no one had attended. On 17 March 2023 he raised a further complaint about the handling of the window repairs and also raised concerns about the welfare and storage unit that had been left in the car parking area by contractors. He said that an ambulance that had been called for his partner had got stuck in the mud due to the location of the unit, and a second ambulance had to be called. On 28 April 2023 the resident again said a surveyor was due to inspect the windows as they were releasing a lot of heat however, the surveyor had not attended.
- The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 8 June 2023. It said that it had installed draught excluders on the front door and kitchen window and that window and door replacements were planned for 2025. The landlord stated that a repair had also been raised for draughty windows, but contractors could not gain access to the property on 3 occasions. It found that that there was no evidence that a surveyor appointment had been booked for 6 March 2023. It said that a surveyor attended on 10 March 2023, but did not identify any issues with draughts around the windows or doors.
- The resident escalated his complaint on 13 June 2023. He disputed that contractors could not gain access on 3 occasions and said that his partner was bed bound and so he did not leave the house. The resident also stated that only the front door and 1 living room window had been insulated.
- The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 22 June 2023. The landlord stated that a repair was logged on 30 January 2023 for draughts from the front door and kitchen window, and its contractor attended on 3 March 2023 to fit draught excluders. The landlord acknowledged that this repair took longer than expected and offered an apology. It again referred to the 3 appointments which were attended but access could not be gained. The landlord said that after further reports from the resident, an appointment was attended on 19 June 2023 and the front door was adjusted. The landlord reiterated that the windows were due to be replaced in 2025 as part of its planned works programme.
Events following the end of the landlord’s complaint process
- The resident raised his complaint with the Ombudsman on 20 July 2023 and said that he was dissatisfied with the final complaint response. In October, November and December 2023, he further contacted the Ombudsman and said that the property was cold, that the lounge window had blown and that there was an issue with condensation.
- In March 2024 the resident informed the Ombudsman that the landlord had replaced some blown windowpanes, but that this was only a temporary solution. He said that the property continued to be cold and draughty. In July 2024 he told the Ombudsman that a surveyor had inspected the loft and this had been insulated. However, he said that nothing had been done with the windows.
- On 13 November 2024 the resident informed the Ombudsman that the windows and front door remained cold and draughty. He said that the landlord had installed insulation around the windows but this falls off when he opens the windows. The resident said that in order to resolve his complaint, he wanted new windows to be installed and to be compensated for the extra energy he has been required to use to heat the property.
Assessment and findings
The landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows and doors in the resident’s property.
- The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that routine repairs are repairs that do not pose an immediate risk to customers or the property, and will be carried out within 28 days.
- A repair was raised on 30 January 2023 following reports that there was a gap at the bottom of the front door and draughts around the kitchen window. An engineer attended on 3 March 2023 and the repairs notes state that draught excluders were installed around the front door and kitchen window. It is noted that the resident said a living room window was draught proofed on this visit, rather than the kitchen window. It is unclear whether the repairs notes are incorrect regarding this point.
- The repairs response indicates that there was a slight delay outside of the 28-day timescale stipulated in the landlord’s repairs policy. While no failing has been found due to the delay being minor, this was a shortcoming by the landlord. There were vulnerabilities in the property as the resident’s partner was unwell, and it is noted that the resident raised the report during winter. The landlord therefore ought to have taken these factors into account when considering the urgency of the repair.
- The resident contacted the landlord on 3 March 2023 and said that a surveyor was also due to attend that day. No records have been provided to reflect that a further inspection was scheduled for this date and it is unclear whether this visit was confirmed with the resident verbally. Given the lack of evidence to reflect an inspection scheduled for this date, no failing has been identified here on the part of the landlord.
- The notes indicate that following the resident’s report, the landlord contacted the surveyor and it was noted that they would attend the resident’s property on Monday 6 March. The resident made further contact with the landlord on 6 March 2023 and reported that the surveyor had not attended. The landlord again chased the surveyor and an appointment was scheduled for 10 March 2023. It is unclear whether the landlord wrongly advise the resident that an appointment would take place on 6 March 2023 or whether this appointment was scheduled and missed. However, this reflects a failure by the landlord to provide clear information to the resident.
- The evidence shows that the landlord promptly re-scheduled the appointment and the surveyor attended on 10 March 2023. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said that the surveyor had identified no issues with draughts around the windows and doors during this visit. The landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with the surveyor’s report or any contemporaneous notes made by the surveyor in relation to the 10 March 2023 inspection. The landlord ought to maintain accurate and clear records of repairs visits and provide these to the Ombudsman. It has therefore not been possible to scrutinise the findings of this inspection.
- The resident made a further report that the windows and doors were draughty on 28 March 2023. He said that he was using more heating as a result, and that he had previously been promised new windows. The repairs records state that contractors attended on 28 April 2023, 3 May 2023 and 24 May 2023 but could not gain access. It is noted that the resident disputed that these visits took place.
- While it is not possible for the Ombudsman to determine whether the visits did or did not take place, it is noted that no evidence has been provided to reflect communication with the resident to schedule these appointments, and it is unclear whether he was notified in advance. Landlords should ensure that they work with residents to schedule repairs visits at convenient times.
- The resident continued to report draughts from doors and windows on 30 May 2023 and 8 June 2023. A repairs appointment took place on 19 June 2023 and the repairs notes state that the front door was eased and adjusted, and draught excluders were applied to windows. While this was an appropriate action, it is unclear as to why these works were not undertaken sooner, given that the resident had been reporting the issues since January 2023.
- In its 22 June 2023 stage 2 response, the landlord said that works to the windows and door had been completed and no further actions were identified. However, it is evident that the resident continued to report issues and on 26 June 2023, a works order was raised for the living room window to be replaced. This indicates that the repairs undertaken prior to the stage 2 response did not successfully resolve the issues. It is unclear whether the window was replaced.
- Following further reports by the resident, works orders were raised for repairs related to the windows in November 2023, January 2024 and March 2024. In April 2024, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that there was 1 outstanding window repair which was due to be completed on 7 May 2024. The repairs notes state that works were completed on this date to remove and install a new large, double-glazed unit in the kitchen. It is noted that the resident informed the Ombudsman that the landlord had only undertaken draught proofing works, rather than window replacements.
- The evidence indicates that various repairs have been undertaken since the stage 2 response. This suggests that the landlord may not have carried out sufficient inspections of the windows when the resident initially raised his concerns in January 2023.
- The landlord said it would replace the windows as part of its “planned works programme”. It is good practice for landlords to schedule major works such as window replacements in advance and to have a programme for such works so that multiple properties can be renovated at the same time. However, landlords are expected to carry out window replacements outside such major works programmes if it is necessary to do so based on the condition of that particular property, to ensure the property is in a safe and habitable condition.
- While the landlord did complete remedial works, it is not apparent whether it undertook an inspection with specific consideration to whether works should be completed in advance of its planned works programme.
- Although a reactive approach to repairs is generally considered appropriate for landlords, there is also a requirement for landlords to consider the history of serious issues, such as repeated issues with windows and doors, to identify how it can improve its service provision. Given the volume of reports made by the resident in relation to the windows and doors and the requirement for repeated repairs appointments, the landlord could have considered whether a more extensive assessment may have been required. A finding of maladministration has been made in light of the failings set out above.
- Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider suitable remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
- The resident experienced distress and inconvenience due to the landlord’s handling of his reports of draughty windows and doors, which led to protracted and ongoing repairs following the stage 2 response. He has incurred time and trouble in reporting the issue to the landlord. The resident raised that his partner was unwell and he was concerned that the property was always cold despite having the heating on constantly. We were very sorry to learn that the resident’s partner passed away during the course of these events. His particular circumstances have been taken into account when making orders for remedy in this case.
- In order to “put things right” an order has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident £350 compensation. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for when there has been a failing which adversely affected the resident.
- A further order has been made for the landlord to arrange a survey of the windows and doors with specific consideration to whether they should be replaced prior to the planned works programme, and if not whether there are any repairs issues that should be addressed in the meantime.
- An order has also been made for the landlord to consider whether additional compensation should be paid to the resident following the survey in recognition of extra heating costs he states he has incurred due to the condition of the windows.
The landlord’s complaint handling
- At the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord operated a 3-stage complaints process as follows:
- Early resolution aims to acknowledge and/or discuss the matter with the resident within 24 hours. It aims to resolve the issue straightaway, however, there will be instances where it cannot resolve on first point of contact and will need time to investigate. A formal complaint should be raised if an issue cannot be immediately resolved and if the customer has raised the same issue on 3 separate occasions or if the customer requests a formal complaint to be raised. The target response time is 5 working days.
- Stage 1 complaints, known as “manager investigation”, aim to acknowledge and/or discuss the matter within 24 hours. It aims to respond to the customer with what actions it will take to resolve within 5 working days.
- Stage 2 complaints, known as “director investigation”, aim to acknowledge and/or discuss the matter within 24 hours. It aims to respond with what actions it will take within 5 working days.
- The resident stated that he wished to complain during a phone call to the landlord on 6 March 2023. He submitted a further complaint about the same issues on 17 March 2023. The landlord said that the resident raised his complaint again on 19 April 2023 however, this correspondence has not been provided to us. The resident raised a further complaint on 28 April 2023 when he said that a surveyor was due to inspect the windows that day but had not attended. The landlord logged the complaint on 28 April 2023. The resident referred his complaint to the Ombudsman on 17 May 2023, and we contacted the landlord and requested that it provide a complaint response to the resident by 8 June 2023, which it adhered to.
- The landlord therefore did not acknowledge the complaint within 24 hours, and there is no evidence to indicate that it tried to resolve the issue straightaway. The resident raised his complaint on 3 further occasions before the matter was logged. Further, there were delays in issuing the stage 1 response, and the landlord did not adhere to its 5-day deadline stipulated in its complaints policy, which indicates a failing.
- The resident escalated his complaint on 13 June 2023 and the landlord issued the stage 2 response on 22 June 2023. This indicates a slight delay outside of the 5 working day timeframe.
- The landlord’s complaint policy, at the time of the resident’s complaint, was not in line with the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code. The complaint handling code states that stage 1 complaints should be acknowledged in 5 working days and responded to in 10 working days, and that stage 2 complaints should be responded to within 20 working days. The landlord has since updated its complaints policy so that it is compliance with the code.
- When the resident raised his complaint, he also said that the location of the contractor’s welfare and storage unit had led to an ambulance getting stuck, as referred to under paragraph 6. The landlord did not consider this matter as part of the complaint, which it ought to have done given that the resident had raised his dissatisfaction with this matter. This amounts to a further complaint handling failure by the landlord.
- Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider suitable remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
- The resident experienced distress and inconvenience due to the delays in the landlord issuing the stage 1 response, and because part of his complaint was not dealt with. In order to put things right, an order has been made for the landlord to pay compensation in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for when there was a failure which the landlord did not appropriately acknowledge.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows and doors in the resident’s property.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.
Orders
- Within 4 weeks, the landlord must pay the resident £550, made up as follows:
- £350 for handling of repairs.
- £200 for complaint handling.
- Within 4 weeks, the landlord must undertake a survey of the windows and doors in the property to establish whether the works undertaken have been successful in resolving could and draught issues. The survey should be clearly documented. The survey should give specific consideration to whether the windows and doors should be replaced in advance of the landlord’s planned works programme, and provide a recommendation in line with this. If repairs are identified, the landlord should create a schedule of works with timeframes, which should be adhered to, and provide this to both the resident and the Ombudsman.
- Within 2 weeks of the survey taking place, the landlord must consider the resident’s request to be compensated for the extra energy he states he has been required to use to heat the property. The landlord should write to both the resident and the Ombudsman with its decision on whether it will further compensate the resident for this.
- The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with the orders within the timeframes stipulated.