Lambeth Council (202229980)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202229980

Lambeth Council

27 November 2024

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of window repairs and replacements at the resident’s home.
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant and she lives in a 5 bedroom house. The landlord is a council.
In its evidence, the landlord told us it had inspected the resident’s windows in 2015 and found that they needed replacing.
On 31 January 2022, the resident called the landlord asking when her windows would be replaced. She continued to ask for updates between 14 February 2022 and 4 August 2022.
The resident complained on 26 October 2022 saying that the windows needed replacing and the landlord had not replied to her contacts.
The landlord gave its stage 1 complaint response on 8 November 2022 which said:
1. Its contractor had failed to attend an agreed appointment and had not done any work during the second appointment made.
2. It had told her the windows would be replaced during the capital programme starting in April 2022.
3. It had later told her there were no plans to replace her windows.
4. It had then arranged for the contractor to repair the windows but no work had been done because she had not been at home. It had arranged another appointment for 19 November 2022.
5. It was sorry for the missed appointments and delays and offered £455 compensation.
The landlord raised another order for the windows to be repaired on 6 March 2023.
The landlord gave its stage 2 complaint response on 16 March 2023 which said:
1. It had completed “works” to the windows on 1 March 2023.
2. Some plastering remained to be done and its contractor would arrange an appointment with her.
3. It was sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Events after the end of the landlord’s complaint process

The resident asked the Ombudsman to investigate. She said she remained dissatisfied because some windows were still “rotten” and needed replacing, and the landlord had not completed internal repairs after replacing other windows. She wanted the landlord to complete the work and apologise.
The landlord raised further repair orders in July 2023 but told us on 13 June 2024 that it intended to inspect to check the work had been done.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

Paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme says that the Ombudsman may not consider matters which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period. A reasonable period would normally be within 12 months of the matter arising.
We acknowledge that the landlord had decided that the windows needed replacing in 2015 and included this for context in this report.
However, the scope of this investigation is the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about her windows from November 2021. This is because we have seen no evidence that the resident had complained before 26 October 2022.

Handling of window repairs and replacement

The repairs policy the landlord sent us for this investigation was effective from 16 August 2023. As such it was not in place when the resident was chasing for an update on her windows from January 2022. In the absence of any earlier version being available to us, we have assessed the landlord’s handling of the window repairs and replacements against the policy it gave us.
The policy said the landlord would respond to routine repairs within 28 working days and planned repairs within 90 days. It did not specifically address how the landlord would catagorise window repairs or how it would deal with the need for windows to be replaced.
We understand that window replacement may take longer than repairs. In line with its repair policy, we would have expected the landlord to have completed any repairs needed within 28 working days. Once it realised that a window needed replacing, we would have expected the landlord to have categorised replacement as a planned repair and to have completed it within 90 days.
We would have expected the landlord to have kept the resident updated until the repair or replacement was done, and to have responded to any contacts she made. Similarly, if the landlord intended to replace all the windows during a capital programme, it should have communicated this to the resident and kept her updated.
The landlord told us in its evidence submission that a contractor had referred the windows to it for replacement in July 2015. The landlord did not have a record of the outcome of the referral and did not provide any evidence of action it had taken at the time.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response of 8 November 2022 acknowledged that its contractor had failed to attend an appointment on 13 December 2021. It also said that the contractor had not done any work during a second appointment on 13 January 2022.
The order the landlord had referred to was not included in the repair records that it provided for this investigation. As such we have seen no evidence of the order that the landlord had raised in 2021. Nor have we seen evidence that any work had been done to the windows or any explanation of why no work was done up to 31 January 2022.
When the resident contacted the landlord asking for updates from 31 January 2022, the landlord should have responded. It should have explained its position and given an anticipated timescale for when the windows would be repaired or replaced. We saw no evidence that the landlord had responded to any of the contacts the resident made between 31 January 2022 and 4 August 2022.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response had said that it had told the resident, around March 2022, that her windows would be replaced in its capital programme starting in April 2022. This suggests that the landlord had responded to at least 1 of the resident’s contacts and it is not clear why there was no reference to it having done so in the contact records it provided for our investigation.
It was not clear from the evidence seen how the landlord had come to raise an order for window repairs on 3 October 2022. The landlord told us in its evidence submission that it had raised the order following the resident’s complaint. However, other evidence it provided suggested the resident had not complained until 26 October 2022.
While the order instructed the contractor to report back to the landlord if the window(s) needed replacing, it did not specify which window(s) should be repaired. The landlord’s repair log contained no reference to its contractor attending this order, despite the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response saying it had attended on 4 November 2022 but the resident had not been at home.
The landlord’s stage 1 response had said it had scheduled another appointment for 19 November 2022. However, we saw no evidence that this took place or that any work was done.
We saw no evidence of events after the landlord had given its stage 1 response on 8 November 2022 until 2 June 2023. By this time, it appears that at least one window had been replaced as the resident was chasing following on repairs as well as reporting a bedroom window that was loose.
The landlord had raised orders to plaster around a new window and inspect the loose window. However, its repair records gave no information about when the contractor had attended or what work, if any, was done.
The landlord raised 2 further orders on 3 July 2023 to inspect a “rotten” window frame and where water was getting in through a frame. As no locations were specified on the orders, it was not clear which windows the orders related to. Nor was there any information on the repair records about whether its contractor had attended or what work, if any, was done.
In its evidence submission to us on 13 June 2024, the landlord said that the most recent orders were marked as completed on its system. However, it did not know if all the necessary work had been done and planned to arrange a post inspection to clarify the position. The landlord did not provide any further updates so it is not clear whether it did post inspect.
The evidence we have seen and the landlord’s uncertainty about what work it has done, show that the landlord’s oversight of the repairs has not been adequate. It also shows that the landlord does not have adequate information management practices in place.
The landlord has not demonstrated that it took reasonable and timely steps to repair or replace the windows from November 2021. It has not evidenced that it kept the resident adequately updated. Nor has it evidenced that all her windows are now in a satisfactory state of repair.
The landlord’s failings amount to maladministration.
The landlord offered £455 compensation in its stage 1 response. We consider that this was a reasonable sum for its failings up to 8 November 2022. However, it does not reflect the continued failings after then. We have ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation, inspect the windows and carry out any further repairs or replacements needed.
We have found similar failings in repair handling and information management in other investigations. In January 2024, we published a review of the landlord’s improvement plans and made recommendations for further improvements needed. The landlord accepted our recommendations and is implementing its improvement plan. As such, we have made no further orders for service or information management improvements in this report.

Handling of the associated complaint

The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. Its complaint policy at the time said it would acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days. It would acknowledge escalation requests within 5 working days and provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days.
We saw no evidence that the landlord had acknowledged the resident’s complaint of 26 October 2022. It gave its stage 1 response of 8 November 2022 within 12 working days of receiving her complaint. Whilst this was a little later than its policy timescales, we saw no evidence that the short delay had inconvenienced the resident.
It was reasonable that the landlord’s stage 1 response acknowledged the failings it had identified in its investigation and offered compensation. It also attempted to put things right for the resident by confirming the repair appointment it had scheduled.
The landlord sent us no evidence of its complaint handling between sending its stage 1 response on 8 November 2022 and its stage 2 response of 16 March 2023. As such it was not clear when the resident had asked for her complaint to be escalated or whether the landlord had given its stage 2 response within its policy timescale.
The landlord’s stage 2 response had included an extract from the resident’s escalation request but did not explain when or how it had been made. The landlord had sent us the same extract separately as part of its evidence submission but, again, had not specified how or when it had been made.
The extract suggested the resident remained dissatisfied because the landlord’s surveyor had inspected and said all the windows needed replacing but no work had been done.
The landlord’s response to this was inadequate as, unlike its stage 1 response, it did not set out the events that had taken place since its surveyor had inspected. While it referred to “works” having completed on 1 March 2023, it did not explain what these were.
This suggests the landlord’s stage 2 investigation had not been adequate. If it had been, the landlord should have identified that, while a window had been replaced, others that needed replacing had not been.
It would also have been reasonable for the landlord to have given a timescale for the plastering needed following the window replacement.
Given that over 4 months had passed since its stage 1 response, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have reviewed the compensation it had offered. We saw no evidence it did so and its stage 2 response only apologised for the further delays. This was inadequate under the circumstances.
From the evidence seen, the landlord has not demonstrated that it handled the resident’s complaint at stage 2 in line with its complaint policy. Its failings amount to maladministration.
On 8 February 2024, the Ombudsman issued the statutory Complaint Handling Code. This code sets out the requirements landlords must meet when handling complaints in both policy and practice. The statutory Code applied from 1 April 2024.
The Ombudsman has a duty to monitor compliance with the statutory Code. We will assess landlords using our Compliance Framework and take action where there is evidence that the requirements of the Code are not being met.
In this investigation we found failures in complaint handling. The landlord should consider the findings highlighted in this investigation when reviewing its policies and practices against the statutory Code.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
1. Window repairs and replacements.
2. The resident’s associated complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must provide evidence that it has complied with the following orders:
1. Write to the resident to apologise. The apology must acknowledge the failings we have identified and the impact they had on the resident. The landlord must send us a copy of its apology.
2. Pay the resident total compensation of £1,100. The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears. The compensation is comprised of:
  1. £1000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the window repairs and replacements. The landlord may deduct the £455 it offered on 8 November 2022 if it can evidence that it has already paid it.
  2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling.
3. Inspect the resident’s windows to establish whether any repairs or replacements are needed. This should include checking whether follow on repairs are needed following previous window replacements.
Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must write to the resident to confirm the outcome of its inspection. It must give its assessment of the condition of each window and confirm whether any repair or replacement is needed. If repairs or replacements are needed, the landlord must explain the work it intends to do and give timescales for completion. The landlord must send us a copy of its letter.
The landlord must use its best endeavours to complete any repairs or replacements needed within 8 weeks of its inspection. It should keep adequate records to show how it has done all it could reasonably do in the circumstances to comply with this order.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord consider the failings we have identified. It should decide if it needs to add any further actions to its service improvement plan. It should also consider if it needs to change its complaint handling practices to ensure compliance with the statutory Code.