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

Citizen Housing (202337021)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202337021

Citizen Housing

26 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The replacement of three internal doors and a front entrance door.
    2. Communal door repairs.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident lives in a flat under a tenancy dated 19 December 2011. Her flat is in a converted building with other flats. The tenancy was originally an assured shorthold tenancy that changed to an assured tenancy after 12 months. The resident experiences an unstable (borderline) personality disorder, anxiety, and depression. The landlord’s records noted that she was vulnerable due to her mental health.
  2. In October 2021 the resident raised concerns about fire safety works, this was following a fire risk assessment the landlord completed in May 2021. This led to the landlord agreeing to replace three internal doors and an entrance door in the resident’s property with fire doors.  
  3. On 1 June 2023 the resident complained to the landlord about a communal door latch not meeting fire safety standards and the replacement of her internal doors being outstanding.
  4. The landlord replaced the resident’s three internal doors on 4 to 6 October 2023 and the resident’s front entrance door on 18 December 2023.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 27 February 2024 and said:
    1. it had fitted fire doors to the living room, kitchen and bedroom between 4 to 6 October 2023 but agreed “finishing work is still required” and it agreed to ask its contractor to reattend as it could not access the resident’s property
    2. it replaced the resident’s front entrance door on 18 December 2023
    3. it could not find a record of the resident making a formal complaint and a formal complaint was not “automatically triggered” after a resident raised repairs multiple times
    4. it had no record of any active disrepair in her property
    5. it agreed to investigate further if the resident provided it with details of any outstanding complaints.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint on 19 March 2024. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 26 April 2024 and said:
    1. it acknowledged that there had been multiple reports for the communal door
    2. while it could not control the number of faults relating to the communal door it quickly repaired these on the day they were reported as below:
      1. 6 January 2023
      2. 9 January 2023
      3. 5 June 2023
      4. 21 September 2023
    3. it raised a repair in February 2024 to remove a deadlock from a communal door but when it attended on 11 March 2024 it assessed that it did not need any work
    4. it accepted there were delays to the replacement of the internal doors
    5. its contractors attended in October 2023 and installed the internal doors then but due to a disagreement with the resident they were asked to leave before it could complete the work
    6. it agreed to arrange an inspection to consider what work was outstanding and complete this
    7. it called the resident on 24 April 2024 to arrange an appointment for the next day, but the resident refused this.
  7. The resident told this service that the landlord wanted to assess the works in April 2024, but she refused until recently. To resolve the complaint, the resident would like the landlord to:
    1. remove her kitchen door and replace it with one that opens clockwise or move her kitchen light switch
    2. examine the length of the living room door and plasterwork to complete any necessary repairs including to the communal door.

Assessment and findings

The scope of the investigation

  1. The resident was in contact with the landlord about fire safety works as far back as October 2021 but did not raise a complaint specifically about the replacement doors being outstanding until 1 June 2023. As a general principle, the Ombudsman will consider complaints which the resident has raised within a reasonable time of events occurring. This is usually within 12 months of matters arising in line with paragraph 42.c of the Scheme. For this reason, the Ombudsman’s investigation will not consider any specific events prior to May 2022, which is 12 months before the resident’s latest complaint to the landlord. Any references prior to this are for contextual purposes only.
  2. The resident has expressed concerns regarding the impact on her mental health of the landlord’s handling of the replacement doors at her property. The resident has specifically alleged that this caused her mental health to get worse.
  3. When this type of dispute arises, the courts rely on expert evidence in the form of a report from an independent medical professional. This will give an expert opinion on the cause of any injury or deterioration. A court will also allow the examination of witnesses and allow the evidence to be tested. This process helps the court determine whether a person’s health has been injured by the landlord’s actions or inactions.
  4. Therefore, a court is better placed to offer a binding decision on this as it will have the benefit of expert evidence and will be able to allow examination of witnesses. The Ombudsman can consider any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the replacement doors and communal door repair.

The landlord’s handling of the replacement of internal doors and a front entrance door 

  1. The landlord had no legal duty to replace the residents internal doors under the residents tenancy agreement or the fire assessment it did in May 2021. The Ombudsman considers though that as the landlord agreed to do this in November 2021 it would be appropriate for it to replace these within a reasonable time.  The landlord was under a duty to repair the resident’s damaged front door within a reasonable time, this was under Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 11. This is because this requires landlords to repair the structure of a property, including external doors, within a reasonable time.
  2. The evidence provided shows the landlord was prepared to replace the internal doors, even though they were not under a legal requirement to do so from 30 June 2022. However, there is no evidence they took steps to do this until February 2023. The Ombudsman considers that it would have been reasonable of the landlord to have taken steps to replace the doors sooner than this given they were aware it was of concern for the resident. The landlord has said that it visited the resident on 13 February 2023 to replace her front door but was unable to because she was not in. It has not provided evidence to verify this or to explain what steps it took to arrange a new appointment.
  3. Moreover, the resident said that the police kicked off her front entrance door on or around 18 November 2022. It is not possible, on the available evidence, to establish when the resident reported this to the landlord. However, the landlord was clearly aware by February 2023 that the residents front door needed replacing because it said it agreed to replace it then.
  4. The landlord said that it attended again several months later in the summer of 2023 to measure up the internal doors. It said that it offered the resident then to fit her front entrance door, but the resident wanted this replaced at the same time as the internal doors. The landlord said that while it offered the resident to do this in September 2023 the resident wanted the work completed in early October 2023.
  5. The landlord said it visited the resident between 4 to 6 October 2023 and fitted fire doors to the living room, kitchen and bedroom but it said in its stage 1 response that finishing work is still required. The landlord has not provided repair records or a report to show what work it completed and what was outstanding. Therefore, based on the available evidence, the Ombudsman cannot be satisfied that the landlord acted reasonably or in line with its repair policy during the period August 2022 to October 2023 in relation to the internal doors.
  6. While there was no dispute between the resident and landlord that the work the landlord did in October 2023 was incomplete there is a dispute over the circumstances surrounding why the landlord did not complete the work. The resident’s account is that the landlords contractors brought an incorrect kitchen door and then refused to either change the kitchen door or move the kitchen light switch at her request. In contrast the landlord said its contractors alleged that they felt at risk working on the site and left the job early and incomplete.
  7. While the Ombudsman is unable to determine, on the available evidence, the precise circumstances which surrounded the dispute the landlord has not disputed that it did not complete the planned work or that the kitchen door was the wrong one. Under these circumstances the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to take prompt action to fix the problem within a reasonable time.
  8. The landlord stated that it replaced the residents front door on 18 December 2023. Although it has not provided any evidence to verify this the resident has not disputed it and so the Ombudsman has accepted this. The evidence shows that the landlord was aware that the front door was in disrepair in February 2023. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord has not provided any evidence to verify its account that the resident delayed the fitting of the front door in the summer of 2023 and in September 2023.Therefore, based on the available evidence, the Ombudsman considers that it was unreasonable of the landlord to take 10 months to replace the front door.
  9. The evidence shows that the resident contacted the landlord about the outstanding work on 11 February 2024 and during the week commencing 18 March 2024. By 8 April 2024 the resident added that the living room door was too short and yet the landlord, on the available evidence, had not responded to these requests in a timely way.
  10. In the landlord’s stage 2 response it said that it called the resident on 24 April 2024 to make an appointment for the next day to inspect the property, but the resident refused. The resident told this service on 27 April 2024 that the landlord had been in touch that week to discuss the work but that she disputed the landlord needed to assess the work. Again, when the resident chased the landlord on 17 May 2024, she still refused this assessment. The resident confirmed to this service on 7 October 2024 that she had only recently agreed to the landlord assessing the work on 10 October 2024. The evidence therefore points to the resident’s refusal to allow an assessment as the cause of the length of time taken by the landlord replacing the internal doors after 24 April 2024.
  11. The landlord explained to the resident that it needed to examine what work is outstanding and it agreed thereafter to make an appointment to complete this. The Ombudsman considers that this was a reasonable request for the landlord to make. This was because the landlord had a right to access the resident’s property under her tenancy agreement to assess the work it needed to do, and this was sensible when it was unclear on this.
  12. Therefore, the Ombudsman cannot fault the landlord for not completing works from 24 April 2024 when the resident did not cooperate. However, in the Ombudsman’s opinion there was an unreasonable delay in it taking action to assess and complete the outstanding works between October 2023 to 24 April 2024. This is because there is no evidence that the landlord made reasonable efforts to assess and complete the outstanding work between then.
  13. The landlord told the resident on 24 August 2024 that it had found a new contractor to complete any outstanding work. On 28 August 2024 the landlord told the resident it proposed:
    1. a joint inspection with its new contractor and asset surveyor to assess the work it needed to do
    2. completion of the work including alteration to the kitchen light switch
    3. to paint the three internal door and door frames or offer the resident paint or decoration vouchers so she could do this herself.
  14. This was a reasonable plan in the Ombudsman’s opinion. However, given the Ombudsman understands the work is outstanding we have made an order regarding this. The resident has said the landlord’s delays in replacing the doors left her in an unsafe property however the Ombudsman has not seen evidence that this was the case. However, the delays did cause the resident a degree of distress and affected the landlord and resident relationship. For these reasons the Ombudsman has found maladministration and made an order of compensation to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

Summary

  1. Overall, the Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the door replacements because this service:
    1. cannot be satisfied that the landlord acted reasonably to repair the front entrance door between 13 February 2023 to 18 December 2023
    2. is of the opinion that there was an unreasonable delay in reattending to replace the doors between August 2022 to 4 October 2023
    3. is of the opinion that there was an unreasonable delay in the landlord taking reasonable steps to complete the work between October 2023 to 24 April 2024.

The landlord’s handling of communal door repairs

  1. The landlord was responsible for repairing the communal front door under the resident’s tenancy agreement.
  2. The resident complained about the communal door on 1 June 2023 when she reported that the latch did not meet fire safety standards. The Ombudsman notes that there was a comment in a fire risk assessment for 14 March 2023 that recommended the entrance doors needed an effective lock to prevent unauthorised access to the resident’s building.
  3. The landlord said it quickly repaired the communal door when it received reports. The landlord said in its stage 2 response that it repaired the communal door on the same day it received reports on:
    1. 6 January 2023
    2. 9 January 2023
    3. 5 June 2023
    4. 21 September 2023
  4. The landlord also said in its stage 2 response that it raised a repair in February 2024 to remove a deadlock on the communal door but when it attended on 11 March 2024 it assessed no works as necessary.
  5. The landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with repair records to allow it to verify its account. Nor has the service seen evidence that the landlord responded to the resident’s report on 29 April 2024 that the communal door was in disrepair.
  6. Overall, the Ombudsman cannot be satisfied that the landlord acted reasonably or in line with its repair policy in dealing with the communal door. Therefore, the Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of communal door repairs. The landlord’s failure to acknowledge the resident’s report on 29 April 2024 caused the resident some level of distress and inconvenience. Therefore, the Ombudsman has made an order of compensation.

The landlord’s record keeping

  1. In this case it is difficult to determine the exact points when the landlord completed certain repairs or what work the landlord completed. This was because of the incomplete repair records that the landlord provided this service with. This has affected the services ability to conduct a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report.
  2. As part of this investigation the Ombudsman asked the landlord to provide the resident’s repair records in relation to the doors.
  3. Paragraph 10 of the Scheme states that a member must provide copies (without charge) of any information requested by the Ombudsman that is, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, relevant to the complaint or assessment of compliance with the Complaint Handling Code.
  4. The landlord failed to provide:
    1. repair records to show what steps it took between August 2022 to October 2023 to replace the internal doors
    2. repair records to show what steps it took after 13 February 2023 to 18 December 2023 to replace the resident’s front door
    3. repair records to show what work it completed between 4 to 6 October 2023
    4. the repair records for the communal door.
  5. Record keeping is a core function of a repair service. A landlord should keep accurate and detailed records to create an audit trail and to ensure that it can effectively monitor and manage repairs.
  6. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on complaints about repairs, published in March 2019, states that “… it is vital landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. The landlord and its contractors should keep comprehensive records of residents’ reports of outstanding repairs and their responses, including details of appointments, any pre and post inspections, surveyors reports, work carried out and completion dates.
  7. The landlord’s poor record keeping highlighted above is likely to have contributed to delays which the resident experienced, and which increased her distress. Therefore, the Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlords record keeping.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a two staged complaint process. It must respond to complaints at stage 1 within 10 working days and complaints at stage 2 within 20 working days.
  2. The landlord told this service that the resident first complained about “fire safety works” in October 2021. The Ombudsman also notes that the landlord told the resident on 5 January 2022 that it believed it had responded to her previous complaints. However, the Ombudsman notes that on 16 May 2022 the resident said she wanted to make a “formal complaint” in part about the doors. The resident sent another complaint about the communal and internal doors on 1 June 2023.
  3. Despite this the landlord told the resident on 9 February 2024 that it had not logged a formal complaint about the internal and communal doors. This was because it said that it treated the resident’s complaint as a service request. This was not reasonable as it ought to have treated the resident’s emails of 16 May 2022 and of 1 June 2023 as a complaint. This is because she expressed dissatisfaction.
  4. The landlord provided a stage 1 response on 27 February 2024 and the resident escalated her complaint on 19 March 2024. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 26 April 2024. It took the landlord 26 working days against a target of 20 working days to provide its stage 2. However, this was against a backdrop of a failure to acknowledge and deal with the resident’s complaint fairly or effectively at stage 1. This caused the resident significant distress and inconvenience that damaged the landlord and resident relationship. For this reason, the Ombudsman has found severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  5. The resident told this service that the delays in the landlord dealing with the complaint over a prolonged period caused her mental health to suffer and “undue stress”. The Ombudsman has therefore made an award of compensation to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  6. The Ombudsman has awarded compensation in line with its Remedies guidance which allows for awards of up to £1,000 where there has been maladministration that has caused detriment and a significant impact.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the replacement of three internal doors and a front entrance door.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of communal door repairs.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.
  4. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord must:
    1. write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report
    2. provide the resident and this service, if it has not done so already, with a schedule of the outstanding work that it needs to complete in respect of the kitchen door, living room door and plasterwork. This should outline what work it will do and by when
    3. inspect the communal doors to the block the resident’s property is in and feedback to the resident and this service if it has had to raise any repairs
    4. pay the resident directly compensation of £750 made up of:
      1. £400 for the delays in dealing with replacement of the internal doors and front entrance door
      2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its handling of the communal door repair
      3. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the delays in complaint handling that left the resident feeling “ignored, made the problem, punished, dismissed”.
  2. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders within 28 days of the date of this determination.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord must within 56 days of the date of this determination undertake a review of what went wrong in this case and how it can make improvements, including with record keeping. The landlord must provide a copy of this to the Ombudsman within 56 days of the date of the determination.