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

Nottingham City Council (202323633)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202323633

Nottingham City Council

13 June 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 response to the resident’s repair requests.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bedroom detached bungalow.
  2. On 12 January 2023, the landlord surveyed the property in response to a legal disrepair claim from the resident. The resident reported a blockage in the toilet which overflowed into the bathroom and an external drainage problem causing toilet waste to block. It raised a work order to carry out external drainage works. On 4 April, a contractor confirmed that the external works had been completed.
  3. On 16 May 2023, the landlord completed further repairs to the external drainage, following a further report of blocked drainage. It raised a work order to complete remedial repairs including repairing a hole which had been cut behind the toilet and a repair to the floor which was damp because of a leak from the toilet pipe.
  4. On 9 August 2023, Citizens Advice raised a complaint on behalf of the resident. She was unhappy that the landlord failed to complete a follow up repair to a hole in her bathroom wall after the major works. She reported that slugs and flying ants were entering the property through the hole. She was also unhappy that water was penetrating the bathroom floor and caused the chipboard underneath to be damp. As a resolution to the complaint, she wanted the repairs completed and compensation for distress and inconvenience.
  5. On 24 August 2023, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It upheld the complaint. The landlord confirmed that it had completed the repair work complained of and apologised for the delay in rectifying the issues.
  6. On 14 September 2023, the resident escalated her complaint. She complained that it had been almost 4 years since the repairs process started. It had not completed loft insulation, grouting and chipped tile repairs, and repairs to a cupboard door. As a resolution, the resident wanted the repairs complete and compensation.
  7. On 17 October 2023, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It upheld the complaint. Its complaint investigation found that due to an administrative error the loft insulation job had been marked as complete in error. It confirmed that it had since completed the loft insulation and grouting and chipped tile repairs. It was also due to complete the cupboard door repair in the near future. It apologised for the delay in completing these works and offered £50 for this delay.
  8. On 16 January 2024, the resident brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. She remained unhappy with the landlord’s delay in responding to her repair requests and the loft insulation repair which had been recorded as completed when it had not been completed.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The evidence indicates that the resident was pursuing a legal disrepair claim for the sewage blockage. The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which concern matters where a complainant has or had the opportunity to raise the subject matter of the complaint as part of legal proceedings.
  2. In any case, the complaint was specifically about the response to repair requests and follow on remedial works as part of the planned works, separate from the disrepair claim, which the landlord has responded to within its complaints process. This investigation has only considered the repair issues brought through the complaints process.
  3. At stage 2, the resident complained about further repair issues. While these further repair issues were a part of the major repair works, the landlord could have treated them as a new complaint because the escalation was about repairs separate from those investigated at stage 1. As the landlord provided a stage 2 complain response to these further issues, the Ombudsman has considered these further repairs as part of this investigation.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s repair requests

  1. The landlord’s repair and maintenance service standards sets out its response timeframes for repair requests. It will respond to emergency repairs within 4 hours or up to 24 hours depending on the urgency of the repairs. Priority repairs are to be responded to within 7 days, or up to 30 days if the item is a renewal. Planned repairs are to be completed at the resident’s convenience or as a maximum within 90 working days.
  2. After it completed the drainage repair, it raised an order for remedial repairs to the hole behind the toilet and the bathroom floor. It completed these repairs within 90 days in line with its planned repairs timeframe.
  3. When the resident complained on 9 August 2023 that slugs and ants were entering the property through the hole, the landlord may have considered a temporary repair or recategorized the repair to a priority repair. However, it did carry out the repair on 17 August 2023, which was within its timescales for a priority repair and it apologised for the delay through its stage 1 complaint response. This was reasonable in the circumstances.
  4. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord confirmed that it had completed the further repairs within the timescales of planned works but acknowledged that it had overlooked the replacement loft insulation. The evidence shows that it completed this repair on 17 October 2023, which was still within its timeframe of 90 days for planned repairs. It apologised and offered £50 for this service failure. This was a reasonable offer in the circumstances and in line with its discretionary compensation policy for a low impact failure.
  5. The Ombudsman finds that there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its response to the resident’s repair requests. This is because it responded to the repair requests within its timeframes and when it identified a service failure, it apologised and made an offer of redress through its complaint response, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, put things right for the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Recommendation

  1. If it has not already paid the resident £50 compensation offered at stage 2, it is recommended that the landlord reinstates this offer. The finding of reasonable redress was made on the basis of the landlord’s apology and offer of compensation.