Great Places Housing Association (202228214)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202228214

Great Places Housing Association

13 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the:
1. Garden
  1. Drainage
  2. Fencing
2. Boiler/heating
3. Loft/roof
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The landlord was formed on 1 April 2020 following a merger with another social housing provider. The property is a new-build 2-bedroom bungalow and the resident moved in in August 2020. A third-party company (the developer) built the property. There was a 12-month defect rectification (snagging) period during which the developer had responsibility for dealing with any problems the resident identified. The resident said her property was never properly finished due to Covid-19 lockdowns. The landlord is aware of the resident’s health conditions which include with her mobility and memory issues.
For context, the resident has raised multiple complaints since she moved in regarding issues with the property and the landlord. The resident said she contacted our service regarding her complaints in 2021. However, the first evidence we have of her contacting our service was 14 February 2023 when she complained about repairs to the garden, boiler and loft/roof.
The resident emailed the landlord on 6 and 23 April 2021 to ask if the developer was going to sort out garden drainage issues. She described it as “a swamp” and said there were also fencing issues. The landlord said it sent the resident’s queries to its new-build development team responsible for defects in the first 12 months.
The landlord visited the resident on 13 September 2021. Its notes from the meeting said:
1. In relation the garden:
  1. It did not address garden drainage issues.
  2. The resident said the developer had agreed to come and fix the fence.
  3. The resident would need to discuss the installation of a ramp from the property to the garden with her occupational therapist.
2. In relation to the boiler:
  1. It adjusted the thermostat with the resident’s agreement as she said it was too hot. And the resident should adjust it to suit her lifestyle when required.
The resident emailed the landlord on 25 September 2021 to raise a complaint. The landlord had a 3 stage complaint process at the time. It issued its stage 0 ‘informal’ response on 28 September 2021 and said the resident should:
1. Contact the developer in relation to the fence issue.
2. Contact the local authority regarding adaptation requests.
It was unclear exactly what the resident said in response. However, the landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 5 October 2021. It said:
1. It apologised for the outstanding defect issues and would chase them up.
2. It was sorry to hear her boiler had stopped working. And she should report it to the repairs team.
There was then a gap in communication for 5 months. It was unclear exactly what happened or what was said. However, on 22 March 2022 the landlord emailed the resident and explained it had sent stage 0 and stage 1 complaint responses. It then sent a stage 2 response on 12 April 2022. In relation to outstanding defects, it said:
1. It sent roofers to fit ventilation but they were unable to access the property.
2. The resident should re-book the appointment.
The evidence suggests there was a further 7 month communication gap. The landlord said the resident contacted its ‘customer hub’ on 11 November 2022. There was no evidence to confirm exactly what the resident said. However, it visited the resident on 6 January 2023 to discuss issues with the garden, boiler and loft/roof.
The resident contacted us and complained to her landlord again on 14 February 2023. She said:
1. The garden was unusable due to surface water.
2. The developer had said drainage needed to be installed (a soakaway).
3. There were issues with the boiler.
4. The gas meter installed had a gas leak.
5. The loft was cold and windy.
6. The ‘chocolate box’ ventilation was only installed 10 days previously.
7. She had requested a different housing officer but had the request declined.
Internal landlord notes on 17 February 2023 said:
1. The issues were originally reported on 11 November 2022.
2. The gas/heating issue was being dealt with by a contractor.
3. It surveyed the loft when it visited on 6 January 2023 and identified a section of ventilation had not been installed, which had since been repaired.
4. It approved for the local authority to install a ramp.
The landlord attended with a surveyor on 14 March 2023. The surveyor:
1. Did not find any defects in relation to garden drainage.
2. Recommended fencing be replaced.
3. Emailed the local authority the following day and said:
  1. He noted the ramp was under construction.
  2. The local authority contractor must fit drainage as part of the ramp installation.
The landlord issued another stage 1 response on 17 March 2023, where it did not uphold the complaint, as follows:
1. It had a quote to rectify issues in the garden from the contractor. But as the property was a new-build, it had been raised with the development team.
2. Its surveyor’s report:
  1. Said there were no defects found with the garden drainage or the ground conditions.
  2. Said the poor drainage was “largely due to seasonal weather and was surveyed after heavy rain.”
  3. Made recommendations for the fencing to be replaced with concrete posts, gravel boards and new panels. The work order had been raised.
  4. Had been sent to the local authority and made recommendations in relation to the ramp installation.
3. Boiler issues were handled by a contractor and were resolved.
4. It had raised a work order for loft ventilation to be installed.
The resident emailed the landlord on 18 March 2023 and said she had raised the complaint again as issues from her original complaint in 2021 remained outstanding. She said:
1. The developers said drainage needed to be installed in the garden. However, they do not carry out drainage work.
2. The poor drainage:
  1. Caused issues building her ramp.
  2. Meant she could not sit on the grass as chairs sink.
  3. Caused her plants to die.
3. Its contractor had cancelled 2 appointments in relation to the boiler and she had not heard anything since.
4. She had asked about ventilation in the loft/roof eaves as she had a wet room to prevent the eaves rotting from the damp from the shower.
The local authority emailed the landlord to say the ramp was completed on 19 April 2023.
The resident emailed the landlord and asked the thermostat for the heating be moved on 24 April 2023. The landlord’s contractor completed fencing repairs a few days later.
The resident emailed us on 24 May 2023 and said:
1. In relation to garden drainage:
  1. She had raised the drainage issues within a few months of moving in.
  2. The developer told the landlord the drainage issues needed sorting.
  3. The landlord caused delays building her ramp as the local authority had to address drainage issues.
2. She had boiler issues as it was initially missing a part. But this was now addressed.
3. She was unsure if the loft ventilation work was completed and it had taken nearly 3 years to rectify.
4. There were issues with the landlord’s complaint handling.
The resident emailed us again on 10 August 2023 and said:
1. The landlord’s poor communication caused delays in the installation of her disabled ramp. Work had to stop for a few weeks while new plans were made and additional drainage installed.
2. The boiler and heating issues were resolved.
3. She was unsure what was happening with the ‘chocolate box’ roof ventilation.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 1 November 2023 to provide a stage 2 response. The landlord did not uphold the complaint and said:
1. In relation to the garden/fencing:
  1. Fencing work was completed on 27 April 2023.
  2. A surveyor had attended and found no further work was required in relation to drainage.
  3. Her ramp was installed by the local authority so it could not comment on any issues.
2. In relation to the boiler:
  1. It had attended on 1 November 2021 and confirmed the heating and hot water were working.
  2. A gas safety check was completed on 24 May 2022 after 2 failed visits.
  3. Its contractor attended on 26 December 2022 and topped up the boiler pressure after the resident reported having no heating or hot water.
  4. The resident requested her room thermostat be moved on 4 January 2023. There were 2 failed appointments. The work order was re-raised on 24 April 2023 and a new wireless room thermostat was fitted 4 days later.
The landlord visited the resident again on 4 January 2024 in relation to the garden drainage as well as a number of new issues. It noted and agreed with the resident the garden was “like a swamp.” The resident also complained about the ventilation and said when it is windy she can hear rattling in the loft.
The landlord visited again on 11 January 2024. An internal email 4 days later said:
1. It inspected the garden. It was not waterlogged and “was firm under foot following dry weather.”
2. The resident said extractor fans to her wet room and kitchen were not connected to the outside and the 2 vents were not installed. However, the vents and fans were subsequently connected.
The landlord sent a third stage 2 response on 2 February 2024. The complaint reference used was the same as a stage 1 response sent to the resident on 18 April 2023 which primarily dealt with a separate service charge complaint. In relation to the repair issues, the stage 2 response said:
1. It acknowledged the pandemic meant various issues including electrical and other repairs were delayed.
2. The garden drainage was adequate. And to contact it if she wanted a flower bed created to house flower pots in an area where grass would not grow due to no sunlight.
3. It had raised repairs to resolve the ventilation/roof issues and had identified the cause of the whistling sounds in the roof.
4. It wanted to offer £200 compensation to acknowledge the inconvenience caused in relation to the roof.

Events after the landlord’s complaints process

The landlord’s contractor attended on 23 May 2024 and completed work to the ventilation/ducting in the loft.
On 10 July 2024 the landlord emailed the resident and said it had consulted with its surveyors, its repairs team, and the local authority. It said the level of drainage in the garden should “be sufficient.”

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

On 23 March 2020 the UK government announced a national lockdown due to Covid-19. This was eased from June 2020 when schools and non-essential retail outlets re-opened. The government introduced new restrictions from 22 September 2020 and a second full national lockdown came into effect from 5 November 2020. Restrictions were lifted slightly over Christmas, but there was a third national lockdown from 6 January 2021. Although schools re-opened on 8 March 2021, the “stay at home” order remained in place until 29 March 2021. On 19 July 2021 most legal limits on social contact were removed in England and the final closed sectors of the economy reopened. During lockdown most landlords operated an essential repair service only inside properties.
We acknowledge the developer and landlord would have been impacted by the lockdowns during the 12 month warranty/snagging period. Certainly up until 19 July 2021, when most legal limits on social contact were removed in England. Which was 11 months after the resident moved in.
Often, in new build properties, defects which are not obvious at the point of handover become apparent once the occupier moves in. Landlords and residents are protected by a warranty period during which the developer is responsible for repairing any defects that become apparent. These defects or “snags” are the responsibility of the developer. The landlord must liaise with the developer, if asked by the resident, to ensure that any snags are remedied. The existence of snags does not constitute a failure in the landlord’s service. The Ombudsman will investigate the landlord’s response to reports of snags to see if these amount to maladministration.
The resident also told us about the impact the condition of the property had on her health. We do not doubt these comments and empathise with her situation. But we also cannot determine whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and her health. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by any action or failure by the landlord.
The resident raised concerns and complaints about many issues with the property and landlord. These included:
1. Delays:
  1. Connecting her cooker
  2. Reimbursing her for the cost of bins from the local authority
2. Problems with:
  1. The electrics
  2. Gas supply
  3. The front door
  4. Landlord staff and communication.

The landlord addressed some of these issues at various stages of the complaints raised. However, there was no evidence of all the issues being raised consistently through the full complaints process. As a result, the landlord has not had a proper opportunity to investigate and resolve them. Therefore, they are not considered in this investigation. If the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of anything, she may wish to raise a new complaint and refer it to us in due course if necessary. This would then be dealt with as a separate complaint under a new reference number.

The scope of this investigation:
1. For the garden will be August 2020 to February 2024.
2. For the boiler/heating will be August 2020 to November 2023.
3. For the loft/roof will be August 2020 to February 2024.

Landlord’s handling of repairs

A landlord should keep good records. This enables it to effectively manage any issues raised by its residents as well as fulfilling its obligations as a landlord. Neither the landlord nor this service can properly investigate and respond to complaints without accurate and comprehensive records and this could result in unfairness to the resident. The record keeping in this case was overall of a good standard, but there were a number of appointments where there was no record of what happened. It has therefore not been possible to fully understand what action was taken at every stage of the repairs handling, which has impacted our ability to carry out a thorough investigation.
The resident’s tenancy agreement sets out that the landlord is response to:
1. Keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair including the roof.
2. Keep in repair and working order the installations for room and water heating.
3. Maintain and carry out routine maintenance and repairs to boundary fences and fence posts.
The landlord’s repairs policy (October 2021) said “it will attend all emergency appointments within a maximum of four hours from the reporting of the repair.” Its latest repairs policy says it aims “to carry out works to make emergencies safe within 24 hours of resident contact.”
The landlord’s latest repairs policy (August 2023) says routine repairs should be attended within 20 working days.

Garden drainage

The landlord’s repairs policy says residents are responsible for maintenance of gardens.
In an email to us sent on 24 May 2023 the resident said she raised concerns in relation to the garden drainage within a few months of moving in. The first evidence we have of her raising concerns regarding the drainage was on 6 April 2021. Internals emails showed the landlord escalated the issue on 19 and 20 April 2021. However, it did not update the resident. After no response the resident emailed again on 23 April 2021. She said the developers had inspected the garden and said it “needed drainage putting in.” At this point, the developer was responsible for all snagging work. It was reasonable for the landlord to forward her concerns to its development team. It then managed the resident’s expectations that the developer would be carrying out a “snagging list” of work around August 2021.
The landlord visited the resident on 13 September 2021. In relation to the drainage, it said it would not address the drainage issues. In the stage 1 response sent 5 October 2021, the landlord said it would chase up the developer. However, there was no evidence it took any action, which was a failing.
The stage 2 complaint response dated 12 April 2022 did not mention the garden drainage. However, the landlord raised a repair on 27 April 2022 in relation to drainage issues which was marked as completed. However, there was no evidence what work was done (if any), or when.
There was then no evidence the resident chased the drainage issue until 11 November 2022. The landlord was slow to take action and did not attend until 2 months later. However, it did raise another drainage repair (albeit weeks after the visit) on 23 January 2023. It was unclear why, but this repair was then cancelled. Internal emails over a year later in June 2024 showed the landlord obtained a quote for drainage work around this time. This was positive and showed it took the complaint seriously and was considering action. The landlord attended on 14 March 2023 with a surveyor, which was reasonable. It used its stage 1 complaint sent 17 March 2023 to manage the resident’s expectations regarding the outcome of the surveyor report, which was reasonable. The landlord was entitled to rely on the expert opinion of the surveyor and decided not proceed with the drainage work.
The landlord confirmed its position in the stage 2 response sent 1 November 2023 in relation to the garden drainage. However, after a further visit on 4 January 2024 it agreed the garden was not fit for use. An internal email on 9 January 2024 said “from its observations, the work done [by the local authority while installing the ramp] to address the drainage had not been effective and essentially the garden is unusable.” Following this visit, the landlord promptly arranged for its Head of Development to visit the property. He said:
1. “The garden was not waterlogged and was firm under foot following a relatively short period of dry weather.
2. The recently installed ramp incorporated drainage.
3. The water will naturally drain away from the house due to the garden topography.
4. Persistent rainfall will raise the water table and reduce the lands ability to cope. The lack of vegetation and root systems mean rainwater will quickly turn to mud.”
5. He was of the opinion that the issue was more to do with a large part of the garden being in permanent shade. The introduction of borders with chippings of gravel will help.”

The landlord sent its third stage 2 complaint response on 2 Feb 2024. It offered to install a flower bed along the neighbour’s fence that does not get sun. This was a reasonable approach to take.

Overall, the landlord’s responses tothe resident’s concerns relating to the garden drainage were poor. There was:
1. No evidence it contacted the developer to assess the issues between April 2021 and September 2021.
2. No evidence what happened to either repair raised in April 2022 or January 2023.
3. No evidence it considered attending with a surveyor between April 2021 and February 2023.
4. No evidence it considered obtaining a quote for drainage works prior to February 2023.
5. No evidence it considered escalating the drainage concerns given the resident’s vulnerabilities and health conditions.

The landlord has since taken steps to make the space enjoyable for the resident, which is positive. It has also provided photographs to us of drainage work which has been completed. However, this was over 3.5 years after the resident moved into the property. Overall, there have been mixed messages, poor communication and delays addressing the resident’s concerns. There was therefore maladministration and an order of £400 compensation is made to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident chasing the issues, and her being unable to enjoy her garden for a lengthy period.

Garden fence

The resident’s tenancy agreement says the landlord “will carry out routine maintenance and repairs caused by fair wear and tear to a boundary fence/fence post(s).”
The resident raised concerns with the garden fence in April 2021. She said it was unstable and there were gaps underneath “a small dog could fit through.” The landlord initially forwarded the resident’s concerns to its development team responsible for defects within the first 12 months. It appropriately managed the resident’s expectations that the developer would be carrying out a snagging list of works around August 2021.
The landlord visited the resident on 13 September 2021. In relation to the fence, it said the developer had agreed to fix it. On 28 September 2021 the landlord emailed the resident and said there was “nothing for it to do” and it suggested the resident “continue to use her point of contact with the developer to fix the issue.” Given the property was outside of the 12 month warranty period and the tenancy agreement, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to contact the developer to chase the fence repair on behalf of the resident at this point. However, there was no evidence it did so, which was a failing.
In the stage 1 response sent 5 October 2021, the landlord said it was sorry the resident had received poor service from the developer and would chase it up. However, again there was no evidence the landlord took any action, which was a failing. It was unclear when the fence repairs were completed by the developer. However, the stage 2 complaint response sent 12 April 2022 did not mention the garden fence issues which suggested the fence had been repaired by this point.
There was no evidence the garden fence issues were raised again until the landlord attended the property on 14 March 2023 with its surveyor. The surveyor recommended the fencing be replaced with concrete posts, gravel and new panels. This was to “help hold back top soil affected by the drainage issues.” The landlord promptly raised a routine repair the following day. The resident emailed the landlord on 18 March 2023 and said the fencing had “already been sorted by the developer.” The landlord should have been clear in its communication as to what work would be taking place. The fencing work recommended by the surveyor was completed on 27 April 2023. This was slightly over the routine repair timescale, which was a further minor failing.
Overall, the landlord could have done more chasing the developer in April, September and October 2021 in relation to the fencing issues. It took a month to attend with a surveyor from the second complaint, and the repairs were not completed within its routine repair timescale. There was minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided and it did not appropriately acknowledge these or fully put them right. There was therefore service failure and £100 compensation is ordered in recognition of inconvenience caused to the resident.

Boiler/heating

The first evidence of the resident raising an issue with her heating was when the landlord visited in September 2021. It was reasonable for the landlord to try and resolve the thermostat issue on the visit.
The repair log showed the landlord raised an emergency repair for no heating or hot water on 6 October 2021. It was unclear when/whether the boiler was repaired, however the resident emailed on 8 October 2021 to complain about the delay in completing the repair. The landlord replied promptly and said if there was a faulty valve on the gas meter, she would need to contact her supplier. Its contractor notes said:
1. The gas meter had “locked out” which meant there was no gas.
2. It explained how to reset the meter.

The resident emailed on 11 October 2021 and said “having to wait 21 hours for heating and hot water is unbelievable.” She also said she had spoken to her supplier who said as the property was a new-build, it is a building issue. It was unclear what action the landlord took in response to this. However, in February 2022 she said her gas supplier had since fitted a new gas meter. It was unclear exactly when this was.

The landlord raised another emergency repair on 1 November 2021 as the resident had no heating. On this occasion the landlord’s contractor attended the same day and resolved the issue, which was positive.
The resident contacted the landlord on 13 December 2022 about the thermostat. The landlord requested its contractor attend, however it was unclear if it attended. She then reported no heating or hot water on 26 December 2022. The landlord attended the same day and completed a repair which was positive.
The landlord raised a repair on 4 January 2023 to check the wiring for the boiler thermostat after the recent contractor visit. The landlord visited 2 days later to discuss the issues. The resident emailed the landlord and thanked it for its visit. She said she had been “confused regarding the heating and boiler turning on and off.” This was positive and showed the landlord was proactively trying to address the boiler issues.
The landlord arranged for its contractor to attend to move the thermostat for 10 January 2023. The appointment was rescheduled for 13 January 2023, within the landlord’s policy timeframe for a routine repair, however the contractor was unable to access the property. The landlord’s stage 1 response on 17 March 2023 said the boiler issues were being handled by its contractor. The landlord said the resident contacted it on 24 April 2023 and asked for the thermostat to be moved. The contractor attended promptly 4 days later and completed the job. While this was prompt, the complaint was a missed opportunity to chase up the thermostat issue following the unsuccessful appointments in January 2023.
The landlord attended promptly and in line with its policy to the boiler/heating repairs raised in November 2021, December 2022, and April 2023. However, the evidence suggests:
1. There were delays attending to the emergency repair in October 2021.
2. The landlord’s first stage 2 response in April 2022 did not mention the boiler.
3. There was no evidence it followed up with its contractor after the failed visits to move the thermostat in January 2023.
4. It did not use the second complaint response to put things right or chase its contractor.
Overall, the boiler issues caused some inconvenience to the resident. Given the failings above, there was service failure by the landlord. The landlord should pay the resident £100 to make up for the inconvenience caused.

Loft/roof

The landlord’s contact log showed a roof tile defect raised 16 March 2021. It was unclear exactly when the resident first raised issues with the ventilation in the loft/roof. The landlord emailed the developer on 28 May 2021 to chase the outstanding defects. The landlord sent a further email to the developer on 4 August 2021 and said the venting and ducting in the loft had also collapsed. While the defects were the developers responsibility to address at this point, the landlord could have been more proactive in chasing them for the resident.
The landlord noted the ventilation work was not completed and it chased the developer on 4 October 2021. This was 2 months after it was aware of the issue, which was slow. The resident emailed the landlord 4 days later and said there was a “lack of ventilation in the eaves but roofers had been instructed.” The evidence suggests the developer arranged the roofers to attend as the landlord’s repair log does not show any roof repair raised. This was 7 months after the roof tile issue was raised. Although the landlord was not responsible for defects between August 2020 and August 2021, it could have done more to chase them for the resident.
On 12 January 2022 the landlord’s contact records said “the issues reported [in March 2021] have been seen to by [the developer] – roofers attended but had no access to fit the ventilation – this is the only repair outstanding.” The landlord used its stage 2 response sent 12 April 2022 to tell the resident roofers had attended but were unable to gain access and she should raise a repair. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to take responsibility for the repair and contact the resident.
The evidence showed the landlord took little action regarding the ventilation issues between January and April 2022 and left it for the developer to address. The landlord should have used its complaint response of April 2022 to make sure all outstanding repairs were completed. It was unclear whether the September 2022 repair went ahead as the ventilation repair was re-raised on 23 January 2023 (noting an appointment for 10 March 2023). When the resident complained on 14 February 2023, she said the ventilation “was installed 10 days ago.” The evidence suggests the ventilation issues were resolved around February/March 2023. This was over 17 months after the landlord’s email to the developer sent 4 October 2021. This was an unacceptable delay to resolve the defects, and was a failing.
The landlord attended on 4 January 2024 after the resident raised further issues with the roof/loft. It promptly arranged for an inspection 7 days later. The inspection identified 2 vents fitted to the roof slope were not connected and could cause wind noise. The landlord said roof repairs were completed in February and May 2024. This was outside of its routine repairs policy timeframe and was a failing. The landlord offered £200 to acknowledge the inconvenience caused in relation to the roof. Neither previous complaint response had offered any compensation. Overall, the landlord has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right. But the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. There was therefore maladministration, and a further £200 is ordered (in addition to the £200 already offered in the third stage 2 response sent 2 February 2024) for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays addressing the defects/repairs with the roof.

Complaint handling

We have not been provided with the complaints policy that was in effect when the resident made her complaint. However, the landlord explained it had a 3-stage complaint process made up of stages 0, 1, and 2. The landlord has since updated its policy which states that it will respond to a stage 1 complaint within 10 working days, and to a stage 2 complaint within 20 working days.
The landlord’s handling of the first complaint was prompt. However, the resident was confused by the 3-stage process as she thought the stage 1 was a stage 2 response. The stage 2 response dated 12 April 2022 also did not mention the garden drainage, fencing or boiler.
The landlord sent the second stage 1 complaint response (March 2023) 23 working days after the resident submitted her complaint. This was outside the policy timeframe. The stage 2 response was sent on 1 November 2023. This was after we emailed the landlord following the resident’s contact. However, the landlord were not solely to blame for the delay. As there was confusion as the resident had not expressed she wished to escalate the complaint after the stage 1 response.
The landlord sent a third stage 2 response on 2 February 2024. It was unclear when the resident raised/escalated the third complaint. The complaint reference used by the landlord in the response was the same as a stage 1 response sent to the resident on 18 April 2023 10 months earlier. This complaint related solely to service charges and did not mention the roof. It therefore would have been appropriate for the landlord to raise a new stage 1 complaint solely addressing the roof issues.
There was no evidence the landlord considered compensating the resident for:
1. 21 hours of no hot water. This would have been reasonable given the resident’s vulnerabilities and health conditions.
2. Delayed repairs.
3. Distress and inconvenience caused.

There was therefore maladministration and an order of £250 compensation is made to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failings in relation to complaint handling.

Determinations

In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the garden drainage.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the garden fence.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the boiler/heating.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the loft/roof.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders

It is ordered that within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is to:
1. Apologise in writing to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay directly to the resident and not offset against any monies owed £1,250 which made up of: –
  1. £400 for the garden drainage.
  2. £100 for the garden fence.
  3. £100 for the boiler/heating.
  4. £400 for the loft/roof.
  5. £250 for the complaint handling.

The landlord may deduct £200 offered in the third stage 2 response if this has already been paid in recognition of the failings in relation to the loft/roof.