Nottingham City Council (202316983)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202316983

Nottingham City Council

13 March 2025

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 internal door repairs.

Background

2. The resident completed a deed of assignment on 11 February 2008. The resident is a secure tenant of the council. The property is described as a 3-bedroom house.
3. The landlord told us it recorded the resident has arthritis. After the complaint process was exhausted, the resident informed the landlord that she is a survivor of sexual abuse and has complex post-traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) and emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD). Her daughter has autism and social anxiety.
4. The landlord recorded on 14 June 2022 that repairs were required to 5 internal doors. The resident was willing to pay for the missing doors to be replaced. On 20 June 2022, 5 internal doors and a bedroom cupboard door were repaired.
5. On 5 October 2022, the resident reported the bedroom door was falling off its hinges as the operative had filled the holes with purple filler. An operative attended on 25 November 2022 and reported the resident was requesting new casings for 5 doors. The operative noted the resident’s request needed to be resolved between the landlord, resident and the repairs team.
6. The resident complained to the landlord on 8 March 2023 about the quality of work carried out to the internal doors. She said purple filler was used to secure the wood to the frame and the lounge and bedroom doors were insecure. The resident expressed her preferred outcome was for the work to be completed.
7. The landlord provided its initial complaint response on 21 March 2023. It said an appointment had been arranged for 28 March 2023 between 9:30 to 2.30pm to splice and rehang the bedroom and lounge door to the frames. The landlord concluded by advising the complaint was upheld.
8. The resident escalated the complaint on 7 June 2023. She said:
   1. She was charged for doors which had not been correctly installed.
   2. The doors had not been inspected since the surveyor attended.
   3. The bedroom door had completely come off its hinges. The door frame and living room door were in a poor condition. 
   4. The purple filler used to secure the screws had fallen out.
   5. The landlord should respond to her complaint.
   6. Her preferred outcome was for the door frames to be repaired and internal doors replaced.
9. On 5 July 2023, the landlord contacted the resident to request an extension to its final complaint response. The landlord said it would respond by 20 July 2023.
10. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 11 July 2023. It said:
    1. 5 internal doors were replaced as a recharge. The resident later reported the bedroom and lounge doors had become loose at the hinges. It apologised for the delay and inconvenience experienced by the resident waiting for the works to take place.
    2. The repair to the door and/or frames was arranged for 5 June 2023. However, the resident told the operative that she believed the appointment was arranged for 6 June 2023.
    3. The appointment for 5 June 2023 did not go ahead although it was arranged on 28 March 2023.
    4. A further appointment was arranged for 11 July 2023 but the resident refused access as she was unaware of the appointment date. It also noted that the resident said she saw the operative in a heating van and thought they were attending to fix the heating.
    5. Its next steps would be:
       1. A further appointment undertaken to complete the repair.
       2. If the resident refused access, it would start legal action to obtain an injunction as it had a responsibility to maintain its property. It reminded the resident that under the terms of the tenancy agreement, she was required to provide access for repairs.
11. The resident emailed the landlord on 15 July 2023. The resident said:
    1. She had experienced poor workmanship as the hinges installed were too small for 2 of the doors.
    2. She had been diagnosed with CPTSD and EUPD. Her daughter had autism and social anxiety which meant she needed to know when workers were arriving. The appointment for 5 June 2023 was not suitable as it was her daughter’s birthday week.
    3. The landlord was threatening legal action regarding access and she was unhappy it was choosing that option when complaints remain unresolved.
    4. She believed the landlord was victim blaming and requested prior notice of males attending the property.
12. After the complaint process ended, the landlord arranged appointments for 29 August 2023 and 23 September 2023. The resident did not grant access for the appointment on 23 September 2023, informing the landlord she was unaware of the appointment. The repairs to the internal doors were completed on 7 November 2023.
13. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

Policies

14. The landlord’s tenancy agreement states that access must be given by residents for inspections, maintenance or repairs. It can give written notice that it wants to enter the property to carry out repairs and take legal action to get access. It can charge reasonable costs for any work carried out.
15. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance service standard says that appointment reminders will be sent by text and its operative will call on the way to appointments. If appointments cannot be kept, the landlord should be informed at the earliest opportunity. Appointment slots will be for mornings, afternoons, evenings, school runs, all day and Saturday.

Internal door repairs

16. It is not disputed that the landlord agreed to repair 5 internal doors in June 2022. Around 3 months later, in October 2022, the resident reported poor workmanship as 2 of the doors were coming off their hinges. Landlords should make sure that repairs are completed to the appropriate standard. This is vital to build trust between residents and landlords. It was reasonable that the landlord attended in November 2022 within its priority repairs timescale to remedy the reported defects to the internal doors. 
17. The operative’s comments on the work order stated the resident’s request for 5 new door casings needed to be resolved between the resident, the landlord and the repairs team. There is no evidence the landlord took any action following the feedback from the operative. This caused inconvenience and frustration to the resident as the landlord failed to communicate the action it proposed to take.
18. There was a 4-month gap until March 2023 when the resident made a complaint to the landlord about its failure to act. The lack of evidence between November 2022 to March 2023 means it is not possible to assess whether the landlord acted appropriately to address the resident’s concerns as the Ombudsman can only rely on the evidence provided.
19. Once the complaint was received, the landlord raised a repair for the internal door frames to the lounge and bedroom with a target date of 5 May 2023. It was reasonable for the landlord to raise the repair as it fell within its obligations.
20. It is accepted that the workmanship to the lounge and bedroom was poor. It was reasonable for an appointment to be made for 28 March 2023 to repair the doors. Whilst the landlord recorded that the resident was happy with the appointment, its records do not say whether the appointment was kept or the outcome. This is not reasonable as the landlord’s records should show the outcome of repairs and the action taken.
21. The resident said she did not receive prior notification of the appointments for 5 June 2023 and 19 June 2023. Through its complaint investigation, the landlord did not evidence any consideration of communications with the resident when arranging these repair appointments. This was not reasonable as it is unclear that the landlord acted in accordance with its repair policy which says it will agree appointments in advance with residents.
22. The resident maintained that text reminders were not sent in advance of appointment dates. There is no evidence that this was investigated by the landlord. It is understandable the resident may have felt frustrated by this and caused her to believe her concerns were not taken seriously.
23. With regard to the appointment arranged for 5 July 2023 to rehang the lounge and bedroom door, the resident said she believed the appointment was for 6 July 2023. It is evident there was a misunderstanding on the appointment date and time. It was reasonable for the landlord to promptly make a further appointment.
24. The landlord’s records show that it recognised the resident may not have received the letter informing her of the appointment arranged for 11 July 2023. This was likely because the letter was sent by second class post. The resident refused access for the appointment as she believed the operative was a heating engineer. Given the lack of evidence around the landlord’s handling of earlier appointments, it was heavy handed for the landlord to issue a warning under its tenancy terms.
25. The resident’s escalation to the final stage of the complaint procedure referred to the possibility of a mental health condition. The landlord should have taken reasonable steps to enquire further about the resident’s health condition and whether any support was required. An order has been made for the landlord to contact the resident to discuss any vulnerabilities that should be recorded.
26. It was reasonable for the landlord to address in its final complaint response the reports of unacceptable language by the resident it had received. It is noted the resident disputed the reported behaviours. Having received reports of unacceptable language, the landlord explained to the resident the action it would take if it received further reports. The landlord has a responsibility to make sure all staff work in a safe environment. It informed the resident of its concerns and gave her the opportunity to adjust her behaviour.
27. In its complaint response, the landlord apologised for the inconvenience and delay experienced by the resident. Though it upheld the complaint, it did not make a compensation award for poor workmanship and repair delays. It did not consider whether it had acted in line with its repairs policy by providing advance and/or reminder notices of appointments in line with its repair policy.
28. When a landlord makes an offer through the complaints process to complete repairs, it is expected to complete those works within a reasonable timescale. It is therefore of concern that the works remained incomplete until November 2023. This indicates that the landlord failed to learn lessons from the outcome of the complaint and there was further unreasonable delay.
29. In summary, the landlord arranged appointments to carry out repairs to the lounge and bedroom doors. However, it is not evident that appointments were agreed in advance with the resident or that text reminders were sent as its repair policy states. There were delays due to difficulties obtaining access but there is limited evidence it proactively took steps to ensure the repair was completed within its repair policy timescales.

Determination

30. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of internal door repairs.

Orders

31. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord should:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the failings in its handling of the internal door repairs.
    3. If it has not already done so, contact the resident to obtain information about household vulnerabilities. The landlord should update its records to reflect any reasonable adjustments needed.
32. The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service within the timescale set out above.