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

Longhurst Group Limited (202313632)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313632

Longhurst Group Limited

25 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. Communal repairs.
    2. The communal cleaning.
    3. The resident’s associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy for a 1 bed flat that is located within a block of flats.
  2. The landlord is a housing association.
  3. On 28 July 2022 the resident informed the landlord that despite it installing closed circuit television (CCTV) and writing to all resident’s about the anti-social behaviour (ASB) on 16 June 2022, the entrance doors were still being left open and the communal hallway had been vandalised. The resident also said that the communal cleaning was not being carried out.
  4. The resident raised a complaint on 30 September 2022 as he said the landlord had not carried out the repairs to the communal hallway. He said plaster had been ripped off the walls, the front door and window frames were hanging off, the stair handrail had been ripped off, the back gate could be kicked open when locked and there was rubbish everywhere. He asked the landlord to review the CCTV footage to see who was propping the entrance doors open and causing the ASB.
  5. On 8 December 2022 the landlord placed the resident on their management transfer list due to the ASB in his building. The resident was offered alternative accommodation on 14 February 2023; however, he declined the offer as he said he did not want to move.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 27 March 2023. In its response it said:
    1. It was aware of many instances of repairs to the building which were being completed, however, due to ASB the repairs were had to be completed multiple times.
    2. To tackle the ASB it had:
      1. Installed reinforced doors.
      2. Employed a security firm to be on site for a month between October and November 2022.
      3. Provided residents with a password protected reporting process where residents could contact the security firm to attend the building.
      4. Worked in partnership with the police to identify the perpetrators.
    3. Although it was aware the ASB was still on-going and there were constant repairs required, it did not feel it could do any more. It asked the resident to continue reporting the ASB to itself and the police.
    4. Its contract with the cleaning contractor only accounted for 1 person to clean. For safety reasons a no lone working policy had been put in place for the residents building. The cleaning contractor had been unable to get 2 people to attend regularly since December 2022. It would review the cleaning contract and, in the meantime, carry out monthly deep cleans.
    5. It apologised that it had failed to carry out regular cleaning and for the inconvenience caused.
    6. It offered to discuss compensation with the resident, however, he had declined this. It was open to discuss this again.
  7. The resident escalated his complaint on 17 April 2023 as he said nothing had been done about the repairs to the communal hallway.
  8. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 11 July 2023. In its response it stated all communal repairs were completed on 30 June 2023. It accepted there has been service failure and offered the resident £250 compensation which was broken down as:
    1. £150 for delays in responding to the stage 2 complaint.
    2. £100 for the time and inconvenience caused in the resident chasing the communal repairs.

Events after the landlord’s formal complaints procedure

  1. In October 2023 the resident raised another complaint to the landlord about the on-going ASB, communal repairs and the lack of cleaning of the block. In June 2024 the landlord offered the resident a £1423.76 refund of his service charge for the year 2023/24. It stated from 1 July 2024 it would no longer charge him a service charge until he moved or the ASB issues were resolved.
  2. At the date of this investigation the resident told this service there was on-going ASB, outstanding repairs to the communal hallway, and the block was not being cleaned. The resident said he wants to consider moving to alternative accommodation due to the issues not being resolved.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has reported on-going ASB and repair issues in the communal hallway within his block of flats for a number of years. This service is also aware the resident has made a number of complaints to the landlord about the same issues. This investigation has focussed on the complaint issues the resident raised in his complaint to the landlord dated 30 September 2022. This investigation will consider the landlord’s handling of these issues from July 2022 to the end of its formal complaint’s procedure in July 2023.

The landlord’s handling of communal repairs

  1. The resident reported that the communal hallway was “a mess” on 28 July 2022. The landlord contacted the resident to discuss the issues on 9 August 2022. No evidence was provided to this service to show the landlord logged any repairs. The resident made a complaint on 30 September 2022 and listed all the repairs and said they had been outstanding for months. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to log the resident’s reports of repairs and investigate its repairing obligation within its target timescales set out in its repairs and maintenance policy.
  2. There was no evidence the landlord communicated with the resident or kept him updated with what action it was taking to resolve the repairs in the communal hallway. This service recognises that it would have been difficult for the landlord to complete the repairs with the on-going ASB. However, the landlord failed to update the resident on what action it was taking to resolve the ASB and estimated timescales for the repairs. The resident was left in a position where he did not know whether the repairs would be resolved. This caused the resident distress and inconvenience as he told the Ombudsman he could not have friends or family visit him.
  3. The landlord failed to maintain adequate repair records, which has impacted this service’s ability to carry out a thorough investigation. The landlord stated in its stage 1 complaint response it had carried out repairs multiple times due to the on-going ASB. However, it did not provide any repair records to evidence this. The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise. The landlord’s poor record keeping impacted its ability to effectively review the case when responding to the resident’s complaint and has restricted the landlord’s ability to put things right and to learn from points in this case.
  4. After the resident escalated his complaint, the landlord carried out an inspection of the communal hallway on 2 May 2023. The landlord did not provide this service with a copy of the inspection report. The landlord stated in its stage 2 complaint response that all communal repairs were completed on 30 June 2023. However, the resident contacted the landlord on 13 July 2023 and said he was unhappy with the outcome of the complaint as it failed to state when the outstanding repairs would be completed. On 20 September 2023 the resident reported repairs which included that the back gate to the building could be kicked open when locked. This repair was included in the resident’s initial complaint a year prior to this, when he raised concerns that perpetrators of ASB were accessing the building via the back gate. The landlord has not provided this service with any evidence that it has investigated or resolved this issue. This was a significant failing.
  5. While the landlord’s ASB policy does not set out the steps it will take in an ASB investigation, the Ombudsman expects it to take reasonable steps to investigate the issue. Between August 2022 and March 2023, the landlord advised the resident to continue to report the ASB to itself and the police. While this response was reasonable, the landlord’s ASB policy notes that criminal behaviour, the misuse of communal areas and damage to property are considered ASB and therefore it would have been appropriate for it to have opened an ASB investigation, which it did not do.
  6. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord appropriately acknowledged the resident’s reports of ASB and advised that it had taken reasonable action in the form of installing reinforced doors, hired a security company for a month, set up a reporting system so residents can report issues to the security company, and worked in partnership with the police. The landlord also made well-being calls to the resident concerning the ASB and offered alternative accommodation through its management transfer policy. Although the landlord failed to open an ASB case, it went beyond the action it stated it would take in its ASB policy.
  7. In summary the landlord failed to investigate its repairing obligation when the resident initially reported the repairs. There was evidence of poor communication and record keeping. Although it would have been reasonable for the landlord to open an ASB case, it did take appropriate steps to try to manage the ASB and support the resident. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord acknowledged, apologised and offered £100 compensation for the delay, and time and inconvenience caused by the resident chasing the communal repairs. However, the landlord failed to investigate all the repair issues raised and therefore failed to put things right. At the date of this investigation the issue the resident reported with the gate was still outstanding, which has caused him distress and inconvenience as he feels this is contributing to the on-going ASB.
  8. Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds service failure for the landlord’s handling of communal repairs.

The landlord’s handling of the communal cleaning

  1. On 28 July 2022 the resident told the landlord the communal cleaning was not being carried out, despite the contractor signing the cleaning sheet to say it had been completed. The landlord acted appropriately by responding the following day, it said it would review the CCTV and contact the cleaning contractor. It acted appropriately by updating the resident on 9 August 2022 to say it was monitoring the communal cleaning.
  2. In the resident’s complaint dated 30 September 2022 he said that the communal areas needed cleaning. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging a meeting with the cleaning contactor on 20 October 2022 to discuss the ASB issues in the resident’s building. The landlord’s internal records state that it was unfair to expect the cleaners to clean up the damage caused by the ASB, and it would write to all residents. It acted appropriately by organising monthly deep cleans in October and November 2022 while it dealt with the ASB and continued to work with the cleaning contractor to find a solution. This service was not provided with any evidence that the landlord wrote to its residents to update them about the cleaning or provided the resident with an update. This was not reasonable and left the resident not knowing what was happening with the communal cleaning.
  3. There was evidence of a lack of communication from the landlord. This led to the resident chasing an update in January and March 2023. The landlord’s internal records dated February 2023 state it failed to address this issue due to staff sickness. A landlord is expected to manage its staff, so any absences do not cause an impact on its residents. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively communicate with the resident and manage his expectations.
  4. In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord acknowledged and apologised that it had failed to carry out regular cleaning. It said it was reviewing the cleaning contract to allow for 2 people to clean due to the no lone working policy. There was no evidence the landlord updated the resident on the outcome of this review or investigated the issues with the cleaning in its stage 2 complaint response. This resulted in the resident chasing an update and asking for the cleaning schedule in July 2023, after the complaint had been closed.
  5. In January 2023 the resident asked the landlord about his service charge and raised the issue that he was paying for the communal cleaning weekly when it was not being carried out. There was no evidence the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns at this time, and it failed to address this issue in both its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses.
  6. In summary the landlord failed to fully investigate or provide an outcome to the cleaning issues within its complaints procedure. There was no evidence the landlord reviewed the cleaning contract or provided the resident with an update. There was evidence of poor communication, and it failed to respond to the resident’s concerns about his service charge. The landlord acknowledged it had failed to provide weekly cleaning in its stage 1 complaint response. Although it offered to discuss compensation with the resident, the landlord showed no learning or that it wanted to put things right as it failed to address the on-going issue within its stage 2 complaint response. The resident was left without a resolution to his complaint.
  7. Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the communal cleaning.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint

  1. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process. The landlord states it will acknowledge a complaint within 2 working days. It will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
  2. On 30 September 2022 the resident made a complaint to the landlord. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 23 November 2022, this was a significant delay which was outside its target timescale of 2 working days. It told the resident it would respond within 20 working days; this was not in line with its complaints policy which states it should respond within 10 working days.
  3. The landlord acted appropriately by contacting the resident to discuss the complaint on 31 January 2023, however, this was 4 months after the resident made his complaint. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to resolve the complaint at the earliest opportunity.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 27 March 2023. This was outside its agreed target timescale. The landlord failed to contact the resident about the delay which was in breach of its complaints policy and the complaints handling code. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively communicate with the resident and manage his expectations.
  5. The resident asked to escalate his complaint on 14 April 2023. The landlord acknowledged the escalation on 21 April 2023, although this was slightly outside its target timescale there was no evidence it caused any detriment to the resident. The landlord contacted the resident within the 20-working day deadline to extend the deadline for its response to 3 June 2023. The landlord failed to adhere to this deadline which resulted in the resident chasing a response on 21 June 2023.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 11 July 2023. This was 27 working days later than its requested extension and 55 working days after the resident asked to escalate his complaint. In its response it failed to investigate all the issues the resident had raised in his complaint. It only discussed 1 of the repair issues raised and failed to provide an update on the communal cleaning. This was not customer focused and left the resident without a resolution to his complaint.
  7. In summary, landlords must have an effective complaints process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord failed to fully investigate the complaint, there was a delay in it acknowledging and responding to both stage 1 and 2 complaints. There was evidence of poor communication. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delay in it issuing its stage 2 response and offered the resident £150 compensation. However, this redress did not reflect all the failings identified in this investigation. It also did not show any learning from the complaint as it failed to state how it was going to ensure it did not make the same mistakes again.
  8. Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds service failure for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of communal repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the communal cleaning.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report. A senior manager must make the apology.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £300 compensation. This is broken down as:
      1. £100 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident by its handling of the communal repairs.
      2.  £150 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident by its handling of the communal cleaning.
      3. £50 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident by its handling of his associated complaint.
      4. The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not added to his rent account unless he requests this.
    3. If the landlord has not already done so it should pay the resident the £250 compensation it offered in its stage 2 response.
    4. Contact the resident about his concerns about his service charge between July 2022 to April 2023. Although the landlord stated it carried out monthly deep cleans, it should review whether the resident is entitled to a refund of some of the charges for the communal cleaning for any period the communal cleaning was not carried out.
    5. Contact the resident to discuss the issue with the back gate to the building which is causing perpetrators of ASB to enter the building. It should provide the resident with an update on the issue, and if repairs are needed, a timescale in which they will be completed.
    6. Consider offering the resident advice on alternative housing options if it cannot foresee a resolution to the on-going ASB.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not already been paid the landlord should consider re–offering the resident the £1423.76 refund of his service charges for the year 2023/2024, which it offered him in June 2024.
  2. The landlord should review its record keeping practices to ensure that all staff are accurately recording resident’s reports of communal repairs, its communication with residents and contractors, and repair logs. If it has not done so already, consider implementing a knowledge and information management strategy, in line with the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.

Chat to us