From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new cases by email. Please use our online webform to submit your complaint. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Call us on 0300 111 3000

Amplius Living (202344407)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202344407

Longhurst Group Limited

30 July 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

  1. The complaint is about;
    1. The landlord’s handling of adaptations to the rear of the property.
    2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs required to the downstairs toilet.
    3. The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for repairs to the fence at the front of the property.
    4. The associated complaint handling

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The resident has physical disabilities and uses a wheelchair. She also only has the use of one hand. The resident has custody of and resides in the property with a child, who she reports has autism. The resident moved into the property following a mutual exchange in 2016.
  2. Due to her physical disabilities, the landlord adapted the rear of the resident’s property in April 2022 by extending the concrete path to improve her access in and out of the property. This Service is aware that at the time, the resident was able to walk using crutches and used a mobility scooter.
  3. The resident reported various repairs to the downstairs toilet in April 2022. On 15 November 2022, following completion of some repairs, the landlord confirmed that all tiling and flooring required replacing. This was due to the previous tenant installing porcelain tiles, which posed a safety risk to the resident.
  4. On 15 May 2023, the resident reported that nettles were growing through and over her fence from land next to her property that the landlord owned. She further reported on 20 June 2023 that the fence had rotted and fallen onto her front path. Both the overgrown plants and fence were impacting the resident’s ability to use the path and access her property. The landlord attended on the same day and cleared the path of any obstructions.
  5. The resident raised a complaint on 13 September 2023. She said that the downstairs toilet flooring was unsafe and other work was outstanding. She also said that while the landlord had attended to cut back the nettles and ivy, it had not repaired her fence, which caused her significant access issues. The resident also complained about access to the rear of her property. She said that the concrete ramp installed in April 2022 was too steep for her to use safely in her powered wheelchair, and she was unable to access her car parking space at the bottom of the garden from the rear of her property.
  6. On 30 November 2023, the landlord issued a stage one response. It said that it had authorised repairs to the fence and in the downstairs toilet and contractors would contact the resident within seven days to arrange appointments. With regards to access to the rear of the property, the landlord advised that work was completed in April 2022 based on the resident’s mobility at the time. It also said that it had offered the resident an alternative property, but she had refused. The landlord requested that the resident supply some further information regarding her needs to enable the landlord to pursue further options. The landlord offered £150 compensation; £50 for the delayed repairs to the fence and in the toilet, £75 for distress and inconvenience, and £25 for the overdue complaint response.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint on 8 December 2023. She said that no one had contacted her regarding repairs, yet the outstanding issues posed a health and safety risk. The resident reiterated her dissatisfaction that she was unable to access her car without needing someone to assist her, due to the steep ramp.
  8. On 17 January 2024, the landlord conducted a home visit to the resident to assess the resident’s access at the rear of her property. On 25 January 2024, the council also completed an Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment, with recommendations made to improve the resident’s access at the rear of the property.
  9. On 3 May 2024, the landlord issued its stage two response. The landlord acknowledged that new flooring had been laid in April 2024, but the work was of a poor standard. There were also outstanding repairs associated with the plasterwork and boxing in pipes, therefore further work was scheduled to take place on 22 May 2024. The landlord also said that while it had attempted repairs to the fence in April 2024, the resident remained dissatisfied. To prevent further distress, the landlord agreed to replace the fence by the end of May 2024.
  10. With regards to the rear access, the landlord advised that it had conducted a home visit on 17 January 2024 where it was discussed that due to the complexities of the environment, any resolution to improve the resident’s access would involve a level of compromise. However, the landlord had received recommendations from the OT assessment and approved the work to be completed. It explained that its approval was delayed due to an incorrect email address being used by the council.
  11. The landlord concluded that it had identified several service failures regarding delayed repairs and complaint handling. It offered £3,808 compensation, comprised of;
    1. £2,108 attributing to £20 per week of rent paid between 22 April 2022 and 24 May 2024 as delayed repairs to the downstairs toilet will have impacted the resident’s full and proper enjoyment of her home.
    2. £250 as a contribution to decorating the downstairs toilet.
    3. £150 for the delayed repairs.
    4. £1000 for the upset and inconvenience caused.
    5. £300 for the poor complaint handling.
  12. The resident remains dissatisfied as the plasterwork has not yet been completed in the toilet, preventing the resident from decorating. The resident said that the work was initially done to a poor standard and it took too long to complete. Furthermore, the resident’s access to the rear of the property remains a significant issue and has taken too long to resolve. The resident maintains that the work completed in April 2022 did not comply with building regulations and was too steep.
  13. The resident is also unhappy that the fence was not replaced until 24 July 2024, as the delay has caused her significant issues with access. The resident is also dissatisfied that the landlord refuses to maintain the nettles and ivy that encroach her path, which again impacts her access to and from her property.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. The resident has raised concerns that the work completed to the rear of her property in April 2022 breached building regulations. It is beyond the expertise and remit of this Service to determine if the landlord has breached building regulations with the adaptations it made to the resident’s property.  However, we can determine if the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for adaptations were reasonable in the circumstances.
  2. With regards to her concerns about breaches of building regulations, the resident should contact her local council to pursue a complaint. Alternatively, she should contact the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman to determine if her complaint is one within its jurisdiction to consider.
  3. The resident raised issues in her initial complaint about the landlord maintaining the grounds behind her fence, as nettles were growing over her fence. The landlord responded to the complaint at stage one. However, the resident did not escalate that element of her complaint to stage two.
  4. In accordance with paragraph 42a of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure.
  5. While this Service understands that the resident has raised recent concerns about the landlord maintaining the grounds behind the fence, the landlord has not had the opportunity to respond to that element of the resident’s complaint at stage two of its complaint process. Therefore, should the resident have ongoing issues concerning the grounds maintenance, she should raise her concern as a new complaint.

Adaptations to the rear of the property

  1. The landlord operates an aids and adaptations policy that outlines the differences between minor and major adaptations. The policy states that major adaptations are defined as structural alterations or additions to a home which cost more than £2,500 excluding VAT. All requests for major adaptations must be supported by a formal assessment by an cccupational therapist or by the Independent Living Service Manager. Unless a resident can fund the adaptation themselves, the customer will be expected to apply for funding through a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) from the relevant Local Authority.
  2. The landlord’s website states that while it is involved with the DFG process by providing permission, reviewing plans, and monitoring progression, the local authority is responsible for DFG cases.
  3. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legislative framework to protect the rights of individuals and to advance equality of opportunity for all. The landlord would be required to comply with the provisions for public bodies under the Act. Under the Act, the landlord has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments where there is a provision, criterion, or practice which puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled.
  4. The resident complained that previous adaptations were no longer suitable in September 2023. In accordance with its obligations to offer reasonable adjustments in line with her needs, the landlord offered to move the resident to a more suitable property. The resident refused to move due to the needs of her child and the need for a garden. While this Service appreciates the resident’s reasons for refusing to move, and the emotional impact that moving properties can have on residents, the landlord acted reasonably by offering a move.
  5. The landlord advised that it would pursue other options and solutions to improve the resident’s access, which were discussed during a home visit. This was positive and demonstrated that the landlord was willing to work with the resident. However, the Ombudsman accepts there may be things the landlord needs to consider when carrying out adaptations and it would not be obliged to carry out adaptation works if it would not be reasonable to do so.
  6. Following receiving recommendations from the OT, the landlord approved the work and advised the resident that it would work with the local authority to secure a DFG. This was appropriate. As above, the local authority is responsible for completing major adaptations that are funded via a DFG.
  7. This Service acknowledges that there was a delay in the landlord providing the local authority with permission to complete the recommended adaptations. The landlord has said that this was due to the local authority using an incorrect email address. While frustrating for the resident, and a minor delay occurring as a result of this, it is not deemed to be a failure of the landlord.
  8. The resident is dissatisfied that her access at the rear of the property impacts her ability to reach her car parking space at the bottom of the garden. While this Service does not dispute the resident’s frustration and inconvenience, she is able to access her car via access elsewhere. In the absence of possible temporary measures to improve access at the rear, and the resident’s refusal to move to a more suitable property, the landlord is limited in further actions it can take to assist the resident before the required adaptations are completed.
  9. Overall, the landlord has acted appropriately and acknowledged the resident’s requirements for further adaptations within its limitations. The landlord will be recommended to monitor the completion of the adaptations by the local authority. 

Repairs to the downstairs toilet

  1. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that it is responsible for the repair and maintenance of bathroom fixtures and fittings, with some exceptions, as well as the flooring in the property. The policy also states that it will complete non-emergency routine repairs within a maximum of 28 calendar days.
  2. The landlord was aware that the downstairs toilet was not fit for purpose and posed a safety risk in November 2022. The flooring in particular posed a significant risk to the resident, which was not disputed by the landlord.
  3. The flooring was replaced in April 2023, but to a poor standard. This would have undoubtedly caused the resident distress, inconvenience, and frustration given the significant length of time that she had waited for the work to be completed.
  4. Positively, the landlord acknowledged its failings in its stage two response. It offered the resident £2108 compensation for the loss of full use of the room due to the delayed repairs, as well as £250 towards decorating the room after the landlord had completed the necessary boxing in of pipes and plasterwork. This was appropriate. The landlord also offered a total of £1000 compensation for distress and inconvenience, and a further £150 for delayed repairs. Assuming a 50/50 split between the failings identified with the toilet and fence repairs, the compensation for distress and inconvenience for the downstairs toilet repairs totalled £500 and £75 for delayed repairs.
  5. Overall, the landlord offered £2,933 compensation for the failures associated with the repairs to the downstairs toilet. This compensation is significant and in accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance where there are failings by the landlord that had a seriously detrimental impact on the resident.
  6. The landlord committed to completing repairs in the resident’s downstairs toilet. This Service is aware that while the flooring was taken up and relaid, the boxing in and plasterwork has not been completed at the time of issuing this determination. The length of time taken to address the issues after the stage two response is unreasonable, and as repairs remain outstanding, the resident’s complaint is unresolved.
  7. This Service has therefore found service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs required to the downstairs toilet. Therefore, the landlord will be ordered to complete the outstanding repairs within a reasonable timescale. While the landlord has offered compensation, a further award will be ordered for ongoing inconvenience, and the landlord’s failure to honour its commitment to complete the repairs.

Repairs to the front fence

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy outlines that it is responsible for repairing fences within the boundary of its properties. As above, it would classify any fence repairs as non-emergency and would therefore aim to complete within 28 days.
  2. However, the policy also outlines that consideration would be given to vulnerable residents and the need to adjust the priority of certain repairs. It provides an example of residents with restricted mobility and access issues due to obstruction would warrant the landlord reviewing the priority of a repair.
  3. The resident reported on 20 June 2023 that her path was obstructed due to the fence rotting. The landlord attended as an emergency and cleared the path on the same day of the resident’s report. Given the resident’s vulnerabilities and the restrictions to access that the obstructions posed, this was reasonable.
  4. The resident complained in September 2023 that obstruction to her path due to the fence continued to be a problem. In accordance with its repairs policy, the landlord should have repaired the issue within 28 days. It failed to do so, which was unreasonable.
  5. The landlord attempted repairs in April 2024; approximately 7 months after the resident complained about continued issues with access due to the rotted fence. This was inappropriate and an unreasonable delay in addressing the resident’s concerns. The delay is exacerbated by the resident’s vulnerabilities.
  6. The resident refused the attempts at repairs. This Service acknowledges the resident’s frustrations given the long-standing, intermittent issues with the rotted fence obstructing her path. However, the landlord is entitled to repair the fence rather than replace it in the first instance and it would only be expected to consider a full replacement if the fence could not be economically repaired or if repairs had been attempted but had not resolved the issues.
  7. The landlord agreed to replace the fence and advised that it would be complete by the end of May 2024. As above, the landlord offered collective compensation for distress and inconvenience and delayed repairs. Overall, the landlord offered £575 compensation for the failures associated with its response to the reports for fence repairs.
  8. This Service is aware that the fence was replaced on 24 July 2024; 2 months after the landlord assured the resident that the fence would be fitted. While the landlord had already offered significant financial redress, the further delay caused the resident inconvenience. This Service has therefore found service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for repairs to the fence at the front of the property and it will be ordered to apologise to the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (CHC) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for how landlords should handle complaints. The code encourages landlords to adopt a positive complaint-handling culture that enables them to resolve disputes, improve the quality of the service it provides to residents and ensure that complaints provide an opportunity for learning and positive improvement.
  2. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process. The landlord should provide a stage one response within 10 working days of the complaint being raised, and a stage two response within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 13 September 2023. The landlord issued its stage one response on 30 November 2023; 57 working days after the resident raised her complaint. This is significantly beyond the 10 working day timescale expected and was therefore inappropriate. The landlord offered the resident £25 compensation for the delayed response. This is not proportionate redress given the delay the resident experienced, which likely caused considerable frustration and inconvenience.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint on 8 December 2023. The resident advised that she was not available to discuss the escalation until 20 December 2023. The landlord therefore acknowledged the complaint escalation on 21 December 2023, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  5. In accordance with its policy, the landlord should have issued its stage two response on 24 January 2024. The CHC states that any delays in providing a complaint response must not exceed an additional ten working days without good reason.
  6. The landlord failed to escalate the resident’s complaint in accordance with its policy, which was inappropriate and unnecessarily prolonged the complaints process for the resident.
  7. The landlord issued its stage two response on 3 May 2024; 93 working days after the landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation. As above, this is significantly beyond the 20 working day timescale expected, unreasonably prolonged the complaints process, and undoubtedly caused the resident distress.
  8. Nevertheless, the landlord apologised for its delay in responding to the resident’s complaint and offered £300 compensation for the delay. This was reasonable.
  9. Overall, this Service has seen evidence of maladministration by the landlord as it did not follow its complaint procedure, which prevented the resident from being able to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman Service for an unreasonable length of time. However, the landlord has made appropriate efforts to put things right by offering an apology and compensation.
  10. As the landlord has already offered this amount, a recommendation has been made for it to make the payment (£300) if it has not already done so. The finding of reasonable redress is dependent on the compensation being paid.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of adaptations to the rear of the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in;
    1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs required to the downstairs toilet.
    2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for repairs to the fence at the front of the property.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, reasonably resolves the complaint about the associated complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord should pay the resident a total of £3,608 compensation, comprised of;
    1. £2,933 that it has already offered for its response to the resident’s reports of repairs required to the downstairs toilet, if this has not already been paid.
    2. A further £100 for the ongoing inconvenience, and in recognition of the landlord’s failure to honour it’s repair commitments associated with the downstairs toilet repairs.
    3. £575 that it has already offered for its response to the resident’s request for repairs to the fence at the front of the property, if this has not already been paid.
  2. The landlord must apologise to the resident, in writing, about the further delays she experienced with the landlord replacing the front fence. 
  3. The landlord must provide the resident and this Service with a specific plan of action it intends to take to address the outstanding repairs in the downstairs toilet. It must also set out a date that all work will be completed. The completion date of all works must be within 4 weeks of this determination.
  4. The landlord must provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of this determination.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the £300 compensation already offered for its failures in the associated complaint handling.
  2. The landlord should liaise with the local authority and the resident to monitor and push forward the completion of the adaptations for the rear of the property.