Hyde Housing Association Limited (202124820)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202124820

Hyde Housing Association Limited

26 March 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:
1. The resident’s reports of disrepair in the property.
2. A replacement kitchen.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

The resident has occupied the property, a 2 bedroom house on an assured shorthold tenancy, with her 2 sons since 2016. The landlord is a housing association. The landlord’s records show the resident has anxiety and depression.

Summary of events

The landlord’s Asset Management Strategy for 2019 – 2025 said stock condition surveys were being carried out on kitchens and bathrooms in properties in order to establish their residual life. This was mentioned to the resident in a letter dated 12 July 2018.
An appointment was arranged for contactors to attend the property on 2 July 2019 to carry out a partial kitchen replacement, but they could not get access. The landlord’s records show the resident was unhappy having a partial replacement as she had been told in the past she needed a full replacement.
The resident reported an issue with a window and the back door not locking and closing correctly on 1 March 2021. It is not known what action if any was taken by the landlord in response. A job was also created to remove and refix a kitchen unit on 19 March 2021. That work was completed on 6 April 2021.
In the meantime, on 25 March 2021, the landlord told the resident that in terms of assessing the condition of her kitchen, it had a 5 year programme that started in the 2021/2022 financial year, and continued through to 2025/2026. It explained that, just before the year it planned to visit, the resident would be contacted for a surveyor to attend and survey the condition of the kitchen. It could not confirm which specific year it would take place, due to no budget confirmation at that stage.
On 12 May 2021 the landlord noted the resident’s kitchen was about 16 years old and she had started looking at kitchens about 3 years earlier, but nothing had come of it at that time. The landlord then created a job to replace the kitchen on 28 June 2021, but the job was cancelled on 2 August 2021 (it is not clear why).
The resident reported a switch on her cooker was not working on 10 January 2022. A contractor attended on 18 January 2022 and sought advice from Property Services about whose responsibility it was to fix it.
On 24 January 2022 the resident text the landlord and explained she had been called the previous year about getting her kitchen done. She asked for confirmation that she was on the list, but it is not known if she received a reply. She also chased the landlord for an update on fixing/replacing her cooker. An issue with the shower leaking was then reported on 26 January 2022, along with lights not working.
The resident contacted the landlord again on 7 and 10 February 2022, and complained that the lights in the downstairs toilet and upstairs bathroom did not work and this had been reported previously. Although a job was created, it was cancelled on 7 March 2022 (it is not known why).
On 14 February 2022 the request for a new cooker was cancelled by the landlord and its job record states it was because it was not responsible for white goods at the property.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 16 February 2022.but it is not apparent when a complaint was made. It said it had asked the responsive repairs team to contact her to resolve her concerns within 5 working days “as this is something we feel can be resolved quickly”.
The resident advised the landlord on 22 February 2022 that she had had no lights in the bathroom or downstairs toilet for over a month.
The resident then sent a complaint to the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) on 23 February 2022. She explained her cooker had stopped working a month before and a contractor had cut a cable at the back. She had been told a replacement had been authorised but then told it had not been and appointments had been cancelled. In the meantime she was without a cooker and other repairs also remained outstanding. The RSH referred the resident to this Service.
The resident advised the Ombudsman on 17 March 2022, that she had not heard from the landlord about various repairs including: water damaged kitchen; broken lighting; faulty shower; toilet not flushing; and windows not shutting.
On 11 April 2022 the landlord acknowledged the complaint at stage 1 and said it would aim to respond by 21 April 2023. On the same day, a further job was created to look at the pull cord to the lights, but this was also cancelled on 25 April 2022. A job was then created and completed on 22 April 2022 to renew a light fitting.
The landlord’s records show there was an “outstanding repairs” inspection on 12 April 2022 (the outcome of that is not known). It completed a “Component Renewal Form” on 20 April 2022 which noted the resident’s kitchen was in a bad way and some drawers were unusable and it should have been replaced the previous year.
The landlord apologised to the resident on 21 April 2022 for the delay in responding to the complaint and said it hoped to provide its response by 5 May 2023.
On 29 April 2022 an inspection and testing of the roof took place. The guttering to the rear was deemed acceptable with no issues, but the rear gutter required assessment.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 11 May 2022. It apologised for the delay in acknowledging the complaint and said it could have carried out the repairs quicker, so it upheld the complaint. There had been unacceptable delays, poor communication, and a lack of urgency to resolve some repairs. It offered compensation of £250 (£125 for the distress and inconvenience caused, £75 for the delays and £50 for the delay in acknowledging the complaint). It also said a surveyor would attend to establish the repairs needed. Finally, it detailed the works it would complete by mid-June 2022, including: replacing a window, checking the bath pipework, hanging 3 doors, checking 2 toilet cisterns and replacing handles.
The landlord allocated someone to oversee the work and keep the resident updated, and asked for the kitchen to be renewed. If approved, she would be notified but, if not, the necessary repairs would be made.
On 12 May 2022 the resident reported the lounge window did not lock and the bath needed checking for leaks and blockages as water was not coming out. It is not clear what action was taken, but the work is recorded as being completed on 15 June 2022.
A kitchen unit was refixed on 7 June 2022 and, on 10 June 2022, the landlord recorded that 2 PVC doors were adjusted and the gearbox was replaced in the window. An inspection of the roof was carried out 24 June 2022 and all guttering was cleaned out. Having been chased by the resident about when the remaining repairs would be done, the landlord said it would chase this up on 7 July 2022.
On 15 August and 23 October 2022 the resident asked the landlord again for updates on the work needed in her kitchen and bathroom. The kitchen was getting worse, the toilets were not flushing and pipe work needed replacing due to damp patches on the ceiling. She said her mental health had been suffering due to recent bereavements.
The resident said she wanted the complaint escalating to stage 2 on 24 November 2022 as repairs had not been completed. The landlord acknowledged this the following day and she was warned there may be a delay in providing a response due to the amount of work it had.
A job was created on 2 December 2022 to check the bath pipework, hang 3 doors and check 2 toilet cisterns and replace the handles. It was cancelled on 16 December 2022 because it was noted all work had been done except the hanging of the doors. The landlord noted the resident would arrange for someone to do that herself.
A surveyor attended to assess all outstanding repairs on 8 December 2022. The resident chased the landlord for an update on 14 December 2022 by text and it is not clear if a response was received.
Internal landlord emails on 23 January 2023 referred to the contractors having changed and that the resident had been contacted in order to measure and quote for a new kitchen, but they had been unable to gain access. Several telephone calls to the resident had also been made. The landlord noted the following day that the resident had been unwell but it had liaised with her about allowing the contractors access, so it was working with her. On the same day, the landlord noted electrical and plumbing works were scheduled to be carried out the following week. The resident also reiterated a new kitchen was needed.
On 26 January 2023 a job was created to install a new toilet on the first floor, check for water leaks under the bath and in the loft space. The job was then closed down the following day. The hallway light was changed on 31 January 2023. Work that was planned to be done in the kitchen by 22 February 2023, was cancelled on 10 February 2023.
In the meantime, the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 February 2023. It said it was sorry that, since the stage 1 response was issued, there was still work outstanding and there had been an issue with communication. It noted a surveyor attended on 8 December 2022 and completed a full report. It detailed the surveyors findings and listed the outstanding inspections/repairs of the water tank, toilets, bath pipework, shower head and screen, and a door. It noted that its contractors had tried to engage to undertake a review of the kitchen, but that had been withdrawn as they had been unable to speak with the resident.
The landlord said, on 27 January 2023, it completed the plumbing and carpentry work and the electrical works were carried out on 30 January 2023. However, the contractors had contacted the resident daily to arrange to survey the kitchen but had been unsuccessful, so it had asked her Tenancy Support Officer (TSO) to liaise with her on this.
The landlord had concerns that the property had deteriorated following the Stage 1 complaint and it appeared it was not being looked after. It therefore needed a longer-term plan to support the resident to bring the property back up to the required standard.
The landlord partially upheld the complaint as there had been delays but it said it had tried to engage with her to follow up on work. She had requested escalation to stage 2 on 25 November and it apologised for the delay in responding. It understood she felt let down and awarded £400 compensation (£300 for her patience through the complaint process and £100 for the delay in repairs).

Events after the end of the complaint process

The landlord continued to work with the resident throughout February 2023 in relation to obtaining access to measure up for the new kitchen.
The resident responded to the landlord’s stage 2 response on 21 February 2023 and confirmed someone was going to measure up for a new kitchen on 23 February 2023. She did not want to accept any offers of compensation until the new kitchen was completed.
The landlord approved a complete kitchen refit in May 2023 and on 12 June 2023 the surveyor confirmed the new kitchen had been fitted.
On 19 June 2023 the landlord attended to locate the fault with the cooker’s circuit or connections. It is not known what action was taken at that visit. On the same day it is recorded that the ground floor toilet light was made safe as was the leak from the pipes to the bathroom sink.
On 21 June 2023 the resident informed this Service that on 19 June 2023 an electrician attended to ensure the electrics were safe as there was a leak from the bathroom sink. She said no plumber attended and she was told a plumber would attend on 28 June 2023. The kitchen had been replaced and repairs in the bathroom completed but pipework still needed replacing. She said she found a new leak coming through the ceiling and the landlord had said it would send a plumber.
Repairs were carried out to the pipework on 28 June 2023, followed by ‘making good’ works. On 18 July 2023 a job was created for a plasterer to repair the ceiling and locate the fault with the cooker. These works are noted as being completed on 7 August 2023. Further work was done on 28 September 2023 in the bathroom, to replace boxing behind the toilet, damaged flooring and a bath panel. In the downstairs toilet the extractor fan was replaced and a mist coat was put on the ceiling.
The landlord asked the resident on 8 August 2023, whether all the repairs had been completed but it received no response. Texts were then sent to her on 14 and 22 August 2023 to arrange an inspection. An appointment was scheduled for 4 September 2023, but on the day the resident was unwell, so it was rearranged for 28 September 2023. The TSO did an unannounced home visit on 3 October 2023 as they had been unable to gain access to check the works had been completed. However, the resident was not happy with this, so an appointment was scheduled for 17 October 2023.
The resident emailed the landlord on 9 October 2023 explaining she did not want anyone to attend as she found a member of its staff had been intimidating and rude. She had a lot going on, including hospital appointments, and had sent dates she was available but did not get a response. She said she was finding the situation overwhelming. In the landlord’s response of the same day it explained that it needed to inspect the property, and suggested she provide a date when she could have a friend or advocate with her as support. This was rejected by the resident the following day.

Assessment and findings

The resident’s reports of disrepair

The Tenancy Agreement states the landlord is responsible for ensuring the structure and exterior of the property is kept repaired and that all fixtures and fittings for water, gas, electricity, space and water heating are kept repaired and in working order. From 2021 a number of issues were reported and many of them took a long time to address. For example, it took the landlord: a year to replace lights that were not working; 2 months to clear guttering; 15 months to repair faulty windows; 19 months to fix the cooker; and 20 months to resolve all the issues in the bathroom. This shows it was not just a matter of a delay dealing with one repair, there were clearly significant delays dealing with numerous repairs over an extensive period of time which is unacceptable. Not only would this have inevitably caused the resident a lot of frustration but having to live with the disrepair for so long would have caused her a lot of distress and inconvenience.
While the landlord recorded jobs as issues were raised, it failed to adhere to the 20 working day timescale for completing repairs as set out in its Responsive Repairs Procedure, on a number of occasions. It is also clear the resident had to chase the landlord several times for updates which is unacceptable.
This Service has concerns around the landlord’s record keeping and would therefore refer it to the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (published May 2023). This stresses the importance of storing information. In this case there is reference to certain visits being cancelled but there is a lack of information setting out why that happened.
There is also mention of inspections or appointments taking place, sometimes with little or no information noted as to what happened at those visits. As a result, an order has been made for the landlord to review the way it records all jobs, and ensure it includes what work was meant to be carried out, the work done, and to record why jobs/visits were cancelled. This should make for a clearer audit trail in future cases.
It is important to say that, from internal landlord emails, it was clearly mindful of the resident’s health issues and that she had been through a difficult time. It completed a vulnerability assessment and tended to arrange for a particular TSO to liaise with her a lot of the time. Although it is apparent in 2023 that the resident became unhappy with the TSO, the evidence indicates they were sensitive to her needs throughout.
Having said that, the evidence also shows that it was usually as a result of the resident chasing for information or making a complaint, that the outstanding repairs were reviewed. For example, when the resident referred her concerns to the RSH and the Ombudsman in February and March 2022, the landlord then started to take action the following month. Again, there was very little progress between July and November 2022 until the resident chased the landlord again and a further assessment was then arranged for December 2022. This shows the landlord took a reactive stance than a proactive one and this amounts to maladministration.
Overall, it took the landlord from March 2021 to August 2023 to complete all the repairs which is unreasonable. There have been unacceptable delays, poor communication, and a general lack of urgency to resolve some repairs. This is something the landlord acknowledged when it addressed the complaint at stage 1. In accordance with its Complaints and Compensation Policy Statement it ultimately offered the resident £300 compensation in recognition of its failings.
While the Ombudsman is satisfied the landlord complied with its obligations to consider compensation where poor service has been identified, the amount offered to resolve matters is insufficient. The landlord has said that at times it had difficulties liaising with the resident, but there were many times the resident had to chase for the repairs to be carried out. Moreover, once a repair was reported, the onus was on the landlord to actively monitor the progress of the job and ensure it was resolved in a timely way, in line with its Responsive Repairs Procedure. It failed to do that.
Taking in to account this Service’s Remedies guidance, due to the length of time the deficiency in its service went on for, in relation to its handling of reports of disrepair the compensation offered should be increased from £300 to £800.

Replacement of the kitchen

There is insufficient evidence to establish how plans came about in 2019 to potentially replace part of the resident’s kitchen. However, it is clear that did not happen and the resident wanted the whole kitchen replaced. The landlord stated in May 2021 that the kitchen was about 16 years old, and having reviewed the photographs provided, it is evident the kitchen was in need of repair.
While it is understandable that the resident was keen to get the kitchen replaced, the information provided by the landlord was in line with its Asset Management Budgeting & Planning Procedure. It says in respect of cyclical repairs, each year Asset Management would create a list of works that would be done in the next financial year. The resident was contacted in the 2022/2023 financial year and her kitchen was replaced in the 2023/2024 financial year. Therefore, the landlord complied with its obligations and acted appropriately.
While the Ombudsman is satisfied the landlord sought to manage the resident’s expectations in relation to the kitchen re–fit, there were a number of times she chased for an update and there is no evidence a response was provided (for example 24 January, 15 August and 23 October 2022). This shows a failure in the landlord’s communication which contributed to the resident’s growing frustration.
In around January and February 2023 the landlord’s contractors apparently made attempts to liaise with the resident over the kitchen re-fit, although no evidence has been provided to evidence these. In any event, from February 2023 the landlord did make contact with the resident and she confirmed an appointment had been made to survey the kitchen on 23 February 2023. Appendix 1 of the landlord’s Stock Investment Delivery Procedure states that where a kitchen repair would cost more than £1,750, a full replacement should be arranged. That was evidently the case here as the kitchen was fully replaced in June 2023.
There was a shortfall in the landlord’s communication regarding the kitchen and this did cause some frustration to the resident. This amounts to a service failure. The resident was inconvenienced having to chase the landlord for information, but the impact was modest as she had already been told when she would be notified of the work commencing. Therefore, compensation of £100 is a reasonable remedy here.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord’s Complaints and Compensation Policy Statement says informal complaints are managed by the department responsible for the service in question. Contact will be made with the customer within one working day, and it should be in position to provide an answer within five working days. It may take longer if more work is needed. However, if the complaint is not resolved informally, it will be escalated to a formal stage 1.
The Policy states that a stage 1 complaint should be acknowledged within 2 working days and responded to within 10 working days. If escalated to stage 2, a response should be issued within 20 working days. If more time is needed at either stage, the landlord says it will explain this to the customer and give a date for its response, and it should be no more than an additional 10 working days.
In this case, on 16 February 2022 the landlord acknowledged a complaint from the resident. It is not entirely clear what complaint it was referring to, but it seems likely it was the resident’s correspondence of 7 and 10 February 2022 which referred to there being issues at the property.
Despite telling the resident it aimed to resolve her concern within 5 working days, no evidence has been provided to show the landlord did that. The resident then complained to the RSH and this Service, which appears to have prompted the landlord to escalate the complaint to stage 1.
It was clear from the resident escalating her complaint to other agencies that she remained dissatisfied, so it was appropriate for the landlord to address her concerns at stage 1. It initially gave a deadline to respond of 21 April 2022 but extended that to 5 May 2022. However, it missed that deadline and issued its response 22 working days after acknowledging the complaint. It therefore failed to adhere to its published timescales.
The landlord offered the resident £50 compensation for the delay in responding to the complaint. Its Complaints and Policy Statement says it ought to consider compensation where there is a failure to deliver to the advertised standard and to recognise inconvenience; both of which apply here as the resident was kept waiting and her expectations were not effectively managed.
Despite saying at stage 1 that someone would oversee the outstanding work and that the resident would be kept updated, that did not happen. Over the following months the resident had to chase for information, culminating in her asking for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 on 24 November 2022.
The landlord did send a response at stage 2 but not until 47 working days after the escalation request. It apologised again for work being outstanding and there being an issue with communication, and while this was appropriate, this additional delay is indicative of it not having learnt from its mistakes.
The landlord did once again, not only recognise the need to offer more compensation as a result of further delays in repairs, but that the resident had been further inconvenienced as a result of its complaint handling. As a result it offered her an additional £300 compensation. That amounts to £350 compensation overall for this issue.
There was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling. It rightly recognised that it had not adhered to its own processes and identified compensation was appropriate to acknowledge the frustration and inconvenience caused to the resident. However, the amount offered did not sufficiently recognise the impact and was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. There were delays at both stages 1 and 2 and the landlord’s communication after stage 1 was poor. There was also a lack of action, having promised as part of the complaint response, for things to improve. Taking all that in to account, compensation of £600 is a more appropriate remedy.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was:
1. Maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
  1. Reports of disrepair.
  2. Formal complaint.
2. Service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of the replacement kitchen.

Reasons

It took 29 months for the landlord to be in a position to say it had completed all the outstanding repairs.
The landlord complied with its Management Budgeting & Planning Procedure, by ensuring the resident was informed in the preceding financial year, when her kitchen re-fit would take place. However, it failed to respond to some of her communication causing minor frustration.
There were delays responding to the complaint at all stages of the complaints process and the landlord failed to learn from its mistakes.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified by this investigation.
2. Pay the resident £1,500 compensation, in respect of
  1. £800 for the delay and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of disrepair (incorporating the £300 already offered at stage 1 and 2).
  2. £100 to recognise the frustration caused by its failure to respond to correspondence over the kitchen re-fit.
  3. £600 for the delays and inconvenience caused by its poor complaint handling (incorporating the £350 already offered at stage 1 and 2).
3. Review the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (May 2023) and the way it records and monitors all jobs. Ensure it captures the details of the job, the actual work done at the visit and if a job is cancelled, why that is the case. It should also put a process in place to make sure all live jobs are actively monitored so it can easily identify if an issue remains unresolved.
4. Review its complaints processes to ensure when a complaint is allocated for investigation, it is actively monitored to ensure responses are sent timely.