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

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) (202333752)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202333752

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV)

27 September 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 response to reports of disrepair to communal steps leading up to the property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared owner of a 1-bedroom flat.
  2. The resident has advised that there have been concerns with tiling on the communal stairs, leading into the property since 2017. A note on the landlord’s system, dated 21 April 2023, stated that there were loose tiles, which affected the escape routes from the property.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 11 September 2023, as she had slipped on a tile. The landlord responded to the complaint at stage 1 on 27 September 2023. It stated that the repair had most recently been reported in July 2023, and that the landlord was scheduled to complete the repair on 28 and 29 September 2023.
  4. The resident escalated the complaint on 20 October 2023. She stated that someone attended on 28 September 2023, however they did not complete the work. She advised that the contractor removed some broken tiles and left these in a pile, creating a further trip hazard.
  5. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 25 November 2023. It advised that due to an administration error, the order for new tiles had not been completed. It stated that it had now ordered new tiles and appointed a new contractor. It advised that the work would be completed on 27 November 2023. It re-offered the £40 from the stage 1 response and added a further £50 for complaint handling failures. It also acknowledged that it should have provided details of its liability insurance in its stage 1 response, due to the resident reporting a fall. It advised the resident how she could make a claim.
  6. Following the Ombudsman’s evidence request, the landlord advised that there were repairs to the tiling outstanding, and that these were scheduled for 9 August 2024. The resident advised the Ombudsman on 27 August 2024 that some repairs were completed to the tiling, but that they remain in a dangerous condition. She also submitted photographic evidence of this. The landlord offered an increase in compensation to £300 however it is unknown if the resident has been made aware of this. The resident has advised this service that she is looking for the repairs to be completed, to resolve the complaint.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. Under paragraph 42.c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider a complaint that was not brought to the attention of the landlord, within a reasonable time period, usually 12 months of the matter arising.
  2. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the resident has stated the issues have been going on since 2017. We also acknowledge that the landlord has confirmed it has a record of the matter being reported in 2021. The first piece of evidence the Ombudsman has within this time period is dated 21 April 2023. As such, this is the first date the Ombudsman will consider in this investigation.

The landlord’s response to reports of disrepair to communal steps leading up to the property.

  1. On becoming aware of the loose tiling on 21 April 2023, and on noting that this affected an escape route, the landlord should have considered the repair as urgent. This is due to the potential risk to the resident. On 28 July 2023 the landlord noted that the matter was a trip hazard. The landlord’s repairs policy states that tiling on walkways, which could be a trip hazard, should be considered an urgent repair. These should be attended to within 24 hours. There is no evidence to support that the landlord took this action.
  2. Following a slip which the resident advised caused an injury to her back, she raised a complaint. The Ombudsman cannot consider causation of any injuries as it is not an expert in this field. However, it is concerning that the landlord had been aware of the repair and its potential risk for several months prior to the incident. There is no evidence that the landlord took any action in relation to the repair, until the resident fell and subsequently complained.
  3. The landlord noted in its stage 1 complaint response that the repair would be completed on 28 and 29 September 2023. The Ombudsman has not seen any records relating to this repair. It is concerning that the landlord has not accurately noted the repair or completed any follow up to ensure the matter was resolved. There was no further action by the landlord until the resident contacted it again, advising that the repair remained incomplete, and that there was a further trip hazard in the form of broken tiles being left in a pile. The Ombudsman is concerned that the landlord did not appear to be treating the repair with any urgency or considering the risk to the resident.
  4. Between the resident escalating the case to stage 2 on 20 October 2023, and the landlord’s response on 25 November 2023, there is no evidence which supports that the landlord was taking action to get the repair completed. A note on 23 November 2023 stated that a temporary repair had been completed but that no action had been taken since. The note did not confirm when the temporary repair was completed, and the Ombudsman has seen no record of this. The landlord failed to operate within the timescales in its own repairs policy and failed to consider the risk to the resident.
  5. The stage 2 complaint response stated that the repairs would be completed on 27 November 2023. There is no record of a repair from this day. The Ombudsman is aware that at the time the resident raised the complaint, the repair had not been completed. The Ombudsman considers that the timescales for the repair were unreasonable. The landlord did not follow its own policy, and it has failed to demonstrate any urgency in getting the repairs completed.
  6. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord did apologise at stage 2 and did offer compensation. The amount offered for the repair was £40. The Ombudsman has reviewed the landlord’s compensation policy and notes that this offer is awarded by the landlord for minor failings. The Ombudsman considers that due to the length of time this matter went on, and the risk to the resident, the failing should have been considered to be high. As such the compensation was insufficient.
  7. On receiving the evidence request from the Ombudsman, the landlord increased its compensation offer to £300 for the delay in repairs. It also identified learning and stated that it was working to improve internal communication, particularly when repairs may constitute a trip hazard. The Ombudsman is encouraged that the landlord is reviewing complaints and identifying learning. However, in relation to compensation, the Ombudsman would not encourage the landlord to revisit on the basis of the complaint having been escalated to the Ombudsman. This is to ensure transparency and fairness for all residents.
  8. The Ombudsman remains concerned about the condition of the stairs and the potential risk to the resident. We are also concerned about the landlord’s failure to consider the repair as urgent, despite acknowledging failings to the Ombudsman and resident during the complaints process. As such there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of disrepair to the communal stairs leading up to the property.
  9. The Ombudsman considers that the compensation offer of £300 was reasonable, and as such we will not make any further compensation orders. The Ombudsman will make an order for the repairs to be completed, and a follow up inspection to be done. This inspection should clearly confirm that a permanent repair has been made to the stairs, to eliminate any associated risk.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will respond to a stage 1 complaint within 10 working days. The landlord responded in 13 working days, which was slightly out with the landlord’s timescales, but the delay is not excessive.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will respond to a stage 2 complaint within 20 working days. The landlord responded in 26 working days. This is slightly out with the landlord’s timescales, but the delay is not excessive.
  3. The Ombudsman notes that the complaint responses addressed the resident’s concerns at the time of them being written. However, it is of concern that the landlord has not followed up on the promises it made in each response. The Ombudsman would encourage the landlord to consider its complaints process, particularly when there are outstanding actions. The landlord should consider whether it is appropriate to close a complaint, before all actions have been completed. In failing to meet promises, the landlord may cause frustration to the resident, and this can affect the relationship between the landlord and the resident.
  4. The landlord offered compensation of £50 for complaint handling. The Ombudsman considers this is a reasonable offer. As such, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of disrepair to the communal stairs leading up to the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is to issue an apology to the resident. The apology should consider the failings in this report and the failure to complete a necessary repair in a reasonable timeframe.
  2. If it has not already, the landlord is to pay £300 compensation to the resident, in respect of its failures in responding to the reports of disrepair to the communal stairs.
  3. The landlord is to send a surveyor to the property to inspect the communal stairs. The survey should identify all areas of the communal stairway that need repairing and produce a schedule of works. The repair should be a long-lasting solution to the ongoing issues. The landlord must also include a risk assessment, identifying any risks until the repairs are completed, and what action it will take to mitigate the risks.
  4. Evidence of compliance with the orders in paragraphs 26 to 28 should be provided to the Ombudsman within 4 weeks of this report.
  5. Once the repairs have been completed, the landlord is to complete a follow up inspection of the communal stairs. This should be carried out between 2 and 4 weeks after the repair has been completed. The survey should confirm that the repair has resolved any safety concerns. Evidence of compliance with this order should be submitted to the Ombudsman within 10 weeks of this report.

Recommendations.

  1. It is recommended that the landlord review its complaint process, to consider when it should close a case where there are outstanding repairs. The landlord should consider how it can ensure repairs promises are kept. The Ombudsman however would encourage the landlord to still issue complaints responses within the timeframes stated in its complaint responses.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord re-offer the £50 for complaint handling.