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

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG) (202211782)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202211782

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG)

30 April 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 resident’s complaint is about:
    1. The landlord’s handling of requests for repairs to a window in his property.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, for a 1 bed flat. The landlord has no vulnerabilities on file for the resident.
  2. In September 2021, the resident reported issues with a sash window in his flat. Contractors attended to fix the window in October 2021 but did not manage to resolve the issue.
  3. In early November 2021, the landlord told the resident that it would raise a job to fix counterweights in the window. An appointment with a contractor was arranged for later that month to carry out this work.
  4. On 30 November 2021, the resident raised a complaint about delays in repairs to the window. He explained to the landlord that he was upset as the contractor had missed the appointment and he had not been warned of any delays or cancellations. He also explained that his young child slept in a room affected by cold draughts and that he had not been able to be there for a vulnerable relative who needed help due to waiting in for the contractors. The landlord logged this as a complaint and arranged a fresh appointment for the repairs in early December 2021.
  5. The landlord gave a Stage 1 complaint response on 14 December 2021. It acknowledged the missed appointment, offering £30 compensation for this issue, and explained that this was due to miscommunication within its contractor. Further repairs were arranged for late December 2021.
  6. On 24 January 2022, the resident asked for another Stage 1 complaint as the landlord had still not fixed his window and not paid the compensation it had offered. The landlord acknowledged this message on 8 February 2022 and said that it would escalate the resident’s complaint to Stage 2. It requested the resident’s bank details to pay the compensation, which he provided on the same day.
  7. On 17 February 2022, the resident asked for escalation of his complaint as the window had still not been fixed despite contractors having attended at the property 3 times to resolve the issue. The landlord explained that his complaint had already been escalated and that notes from its contractor stated that draught proofing of the window had been completed, although the landlord agreed to review this and see if anything else could be done.
  8. In May 2022, the resident sent a photo of the window to the landlord which highlighted where there was a gap at the top and sides of the window frame. The resident apologised for the delay in providing this photo to the landlord, explaining that he had been suffering from poor health.
  9. In early August 2022, the resident chased the landlord for repairs to the window and for the compensation he had been promised in December 2021. He asked again for escalation of his complaint to Stage 2.
  10. In September 2022, the landlord asked the resident again for his bank details to pay the compensation offered in December 2021. It told the resident that it had done all it could do to draught proof the window and that it was normal for wooden windows to let in some draughts. A promise was made to review the windows and see whether they could be replaced in the next round of major maintenance work to the resident’s building. The resident told the landlord that he had reported the issue several times, that he was concerned about the impact on his child, and that he was worried about the impact on his finances due to heat loss from the flat due to the draughty window.
  11. On 13 December 2022, this Service asked the landlord to provide a copy of its Stage 2 complaint response or to issue a response by 29 December 2022. The landlord told this Service that it did not think the resident had asked for escalation of his complaint and that it would consider possibly accepting a fresh complaint instead as an escalation request would be ‘out of time’.
  12. In February 2023, the landlord decided to include the building containing the resident’s property in its next batch of major renovation works. Issues with the windows were planned to be addressed during these works.
  13. A Stage 2 complaint response was provided to the resident on 22 March 2023. The landlord’s response acknowledged that there had been delays in repairs to the window, with contractors visiting in December 2021 who reported that there was no more draught proofing work that could be done and that the window was single glazed. It accepted that it decided to wait until major renovation works were approved to potentially replace the resident’s windows, and that it could have considered temporary options to deal with the draughts until major works were completed but did not do so. It also acknowledged that there was a significant delay in providing a Stage 2 response despite the intervention of this Service. A total of £350 in compensation was offered, £200 for delays in carrying out repairs and £150 for failures in complaint handling.
  14. In April 2023, the landlord told the resident that it would review the resident’s window in the next batch of major renovation works to the resident’s building and asked if he would like all the windows in his flat inspected to assess whether they should be replaced. The resident agreed to a full inspection of all his windows, but expressed dissatisfaction that he was still waiting for the window to be fixed.
  15. In May 2023, the resident reported that the locks on the front and back windows to his flat had broken and that they could not be closed. As the building had scaffold on it, the resident was concerned about security as an intruder could potentially gain access via an open window despite his flat being on the top floor. Contractors attended but could not finish the repairs as special parts were needed. Follow on works were carried out later that month which completed the repairs.
  16. Renovation works to the resident’s building took place in between May and August 2023. The landlord confirmed to this Service in October 2023 that works were done to repair and redecorate windows in the building, including at the resident’s property. In November 2023, the landlord confirmed that it would install secondary glazing to help tackle draughts at the flat and carried out this work in April 2024.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of requests for repairs to a window.

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out 3 categories of repairs:
    1. Emergency repairs – these will be attended to within 4 hours and any further work completed within 24 hours ‘within reason’.
    2. Routine repairs – completed within 20 working days of the date of the repair being reported.
    3. Emergency defects – aimed to have all major services restored within 24 hours.
  2. Repairs records show that the resident first raised concerns about the window on 30 September 2021, reporting that the fasteners were not working and the window would not close properly. It is not clear if this repair was classed as emergency or routine. Contractors did attend on 29 October 2021, 21 working days after the report, but could not fix the issue with the window not closing properly completely. Follow on works were raised on 3 November 2021 to address this with an appointment on 29 November 2021, 42 working days after the initial report, that was missed. Records state that the window was finally repaired on 3 May 2022, 148 working days after the initial report, although the resident continued to contact the landlord about repairs to the window beyond this date, indicating that repairs had not been successful. This is a failure of the landlord to complete repairs within its own timescales for carrying out repairs. The resident would have been frustrated by the delays, inconvenienced by cold draughts and lack of security, as well as concerned about the landlord’s ability to carry out effective repairs.
  3. It is positive that the landlord decided to replace the resident’s window, although waiting until major renovation works were due to the building contributed to further delays in carrying out the repairs. This Service notes that it is often sensible to incorporate major repairs with renovation works to minimise disruption to residents, as is the case here, but a landlord risks further delays to successful completion of outstanding repairs by taking this approach. As the landlord has acknowledged in its stage 2 response, it could have looked into temporary options for handling draughts and/or securing the window until the renovation work took place as a ‘stop gap’ measure and it did not let the resident know that window replacement would only take place during the next major renovation programme. Failing to let the resident know about this approach is poor communication and would have been frustrating for the resident as he would not have known when repairs would take place.
  4. The resident repeatedly raised concerns about cold draughts having an impact on him and his young child, as well as concerns about the security of his flat while there were ongoing issues with the window. The landlord should have considered its legal obligation to ensure that the property was fit for habitation throughout the course of the resident’s tenancy, as per the landlord’s obligations under section 9A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, particularly as excess cold and difficulties in keeping a property secure against unauthorised entry are both potentially hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). This could have included providing temporary solutions to tackle excess cold and security concerns pending the replacement of the window and the installation of secondary glazing. It is positive that secondary glazing has now been installed, but this was over 2 years and 6 months from the date of the resident’s first report. This was a failure to take account of the resident’s concerns, to acknowledge the impact on the resident and his young child, and to take appropriate action in a timely manner when the landlord may have been in breach of a legal obligation towards the resident.
  5. Due to the landlord’s failure to effectively progress repairs after the initial report, delays in carrying out effective repairs, poor internal communication which led to a missed appointment, failure to offer stop gap solutions pending the replacement of the resident’s window or the installation of secondary glazing, and failure to keep the resident informed of the landlord’s decisions about how it would handle repairs or its renovation plans, this Service has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of requests for repairs to a window in the resident’s property. Although the landlord has now completed effective repairs, installed secondary glazing, and offered £200 compensation for its failings, this is not enough to put things right for the resident. This Service has therefore ordered that further compensation is offered to the resident and the landlord takes steps to reflect on what went wrong in this case.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

  1. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints procedure. Stage 1 complaints are logged within 1 working day of a complaint being made, the complaint acknowledged within 2 working days, and a Stage 1 response provided within 10 working days. Residents can request escalation of their complaint up to 20 working days after the Stage 1 response was given or when follow up actions were completed. Escalation requests are acknowledged within 2 working days and a Stage 2 response provided within 20 working days of the date of the escalation request.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy states that follow up actions from complaint responses should be monitored, with the resident contacted to see if they have been carried out. If follow up actions have not been carried out, a new date should be agreed with the resident for completion of these actions and the issue escalated to a relevant head of service within the landlord. Completion of outstanding actions should be prioritised.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 30 November 2021, with the landlord acknowledging the complaint on 1 December 2021. This is within 2 working days and complied with the landlord’s policy. The Stage 1 response was given on 14 December 2021, 10 working days after the complaint was made and in line with the landlord’s policy.
  4. The Stage 1 response was apologetic, acknowledged there had been a failure in carrying out repairs and that the resident had been inconvenienced by the missed appointment. It also offered to resolve the repairs by arranging a further appointment and offered £30 compensation for the missed appointment. However, it is evident that the follow up actions from the Stage 1 response were not adequately monitored as the resident asked for another Stage 1 complaint on 24 January 2022 as the window had not been fixed and he had not received the promised compensation. This is a failure of the landlord to do enough to put things right after giving a complaints response, undermined the landlord and tenant relationship, and cast doubt on whether the landlord had been sincere in its apology and if it was actually prepared to put things right. The resident would have been inconvenienced by having to chase the landlord to follow up on agreed actions.
  5. The resident’s request for another Stage 1 complaint on 24 January 2022 was accepted as an escalation request but it should also have been acknowledged within 2 working days. The landlord responded on 8 February 2022, 11 working days later, accepted the escalation request, and asked for the resident’s bank details so it could pay the compensation. The resident asked for escalation of his complaint again on 17 February 2022 and on 5 August 2022. This Service intervened on 13 December 2022 and asked for a stage 2 response to be provided. A Stage 2 response was provided on 22 March 2023, 294 working days after the resident’s escalation request. This is a serious breach of the timescales in the landlord’s complaints policy with further delays after the involvement of this Service in obtaining a Stage 2 response. The resident was clearly confused about the status of his complaint and what action the landlord was taking to resolve it. Although the landlord responded appropriately at first by accepting the fresh complaint as an escalation request and explaining what it had done to the resident, it failed to explain the status of the complaint on further enquiries by the resident. This led to the resident making further escalation requests.
  6. Although the landlord apologised again in its Stage 2 response and offered £350 compensation for delays in repairs and for issues with complaints handling, this Service does not consider this enough to put things right. There was a failure to follow up actions agreed in both complaint responses in a timely manner, repeated delays in paying compensation offered at Stage 1 despite the resident providing bank details, and significant delays in providing a complaint response at Stage 2 despite the resident chasing the landlord for a response and the intervention of this Service. For these reasons, this Service has found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was:
    1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of requests for repairs to a window in the resident’s property.
    2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident a total of £1,134.70, less any compensation already paid to the resident, comprising of:
      1. £250 for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused to the resident by delayed repairs.
      2. £684.70 for the impact on the resident of not being able to properly use the room in the flat where the defective window was located. This is based on 10% of the weekly rent at £223.03 for a period of 30.7 weeks while the property was in disrepair.
      3. £200 for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused to the resident by poor complaints handling.
    2. Send a written apology from a head of service to the resident for the failings identified in this report. A copy of this apology must be shared with this Service.
  2. Within 8 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Carry out a case review of this complaint which identifies what steps the landlord is will take to prevent the issues found in this report from occurring again in future. A copy of this review must be shared with this Service.