Ongo Homes Limited (202310362)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202310362

Ongo Homes Limited

20 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 the resident’s:
   1. Requests for tree maintenance.
   2. Gate alteration requests.
   3. Associated complaint.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of a 1-bedroom ground floor flat, owned by the landlord.
3. The resident contacted the landlord on 4 October 2022, asking it to prune a tree that was blocking sunlight from entering his property. He asked for alteration forms regarding the possibility of installing a gate at the property.
4. The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 31 October 2022, stating that he had not received any contact from the landlord regarding his requests.
5. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 13 April 2024. It apologised for its lack of communication regarding the alteration form requests and the tree concerns. It said its assets team had not received the resident’s alteration request and asked him to submit the forms again. It would cut the tree as soon as it received a quote from its tree surgeon.
6. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s stage 1 response and asked it to escalate his complaint to stage 2 of its process on the same day.
7. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 18 May 2023, stating that it would clarify from its tree surgeon the exact date they would complete the tree works. It repeated that it had not received the completed alterations paperwork and asked the resident to ensure he had put in place the necessary paperwork to enable it to consider his alteration requests.
8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought his complaint to this Service for investigation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

9. In his correspondence with this Service, the resident has raised other matters concerning reports of antisocial behaviour that have not yet been through the landlord’s complaint process.
10. Paragraph 42.a. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which have not completed the landlord’s internal complaints process. In the interest of fairness, this Service has limited the scope of this investigation to matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 18 May 2023. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions before the involvement of this Service.

Requests for tree maintenance

11. The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for completing tree maintenance. According to the landlord’s tree policy, before it can prune any trees, it must complete an arboriculture report and submit a tree preservation order application to the local authority. It states that this is a lengthy process and the council may then grant or decline the application.
12. The resident informed the landlord about his concerns regarding the tree on 4 October 2022. He said the tree was blocking his sunlight and requested it to prune the tree. He contacted the landlord on 2 further occasions, on 10 and 14 October 2023, prior to making his formal complaint. He stated that he had not received any contact from it in relation to his tree pruning request.
13. The landlord contacted the resident on 31 October 2022, it informed him that it raised an order for the surveyor to attend on 14 October 2022. It further stated that it should have completed the survey within 28 days but there was a backlog and it might take longer for the surveyor to attend.
14. There is no evidence to show the landlord updated the resident between October 2022 and 13 January 2023, when he contacted it again requesting an update. This was almost 3 months after his initial request. This was not reasonable and would have led the resident to believe it was not taking his concerns seriously.
15. The landlord contacted the resident on 14 February 2023. It said it was still waiting for updates from the neighbourhood services team and would contact him as soon as it had more information.
16. The resident contacted the landlord again on 3 April 2023, regarding his tree concerns. In the landlord’s stage 1 response of 13 April 2023, it stated that it was still waiting for a quote from its tree surgeons. It said that it would cut the tree as soon as it received a quote and approved the works. It said that it had previously updated the resident and informed him that the process of tree works could be lengthy and take time to complete.
17. In its stage 2 response of 18 May 2023, it stated it was in the process of clarifying the date for the tree cutting with its specialist grounds maintenance contractors. Its records show it completed the tree works on 27 June 2023.
18. The landlord’s response provided no further details as to when the tree would likely be cut. It also failed to apologise for the delays or demonstrate any learning from the complaint. Although the landlord informed the resident that the process to fell the tree would be lengthy, it would have been appropriate to have kept him updated on its progress and an estimated timeframe for completion.
19. There was a delay of 8 months from the resident raising his request to when the tree was cut, with very little communication or updates being provided. This would have added to the resident’s frustration.
20. In the landlord’s explanation to this Service, it said that it had learned lessons from its handling of the resident’s complaint. It acknowledged that there was a 2-week delay from when it received the quote for the tree works to when it approved the quote. It stated that although it could not control the time it took for the tree team to complete the job, it should have communicated with the resident better. It said it would improve its communication going forward.
21. Whilst it was reasonable that the landlord showed learning from how it handled the resident’s complaint and identified areas where it can improve in future, it would have been appropriate for it to have apologised for the delays and lack of communication and offered compensation to the resident for the distress and inconvenience he experienced due to its communication failures. For this reason, this Service finds there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for tree maintenance.

Alteration requests

22. The landlord’s alterations procedure states that residents can make alteration requests and it would approve these requests within 10 working days after it receives the completed alteration request forms.
23. The landlord’s records show that the resident requested an alteration request form on 4 October 2022. It posted the forms to the resident on 31 October 2022, after it received his formal complaint.
24. The landlord provided no explanation about why it took 27 days to post the alteration forms to the resident. The delay in posting the forms was not reasonable as it was outside its stated timescales.
25. There is no evidence of any communication between the resident and the landlord regarding this issue until 10 February 2023 when he contacted it, requesting for an update on his alteration application. It responded on 14 February 2023, stating that its assets team had not received the alteration forms.
26. In the landlord’s complaint responses on 13 April 2023 and 18 May 2023, it stated that its tenancy officer confirmed they received the resident’s alteration forms and drawings and they sent it to the assets team. However, the asset team did not receive the forms. It said it had sent the resident another form to complete and once it received the completed forms it would prioritise his request and update him as soon as possible.
27. In its response, the landlord did not apologise or acknowledge that it misplaced the residents completed forms and drawings or acknowledge the distress and inconvenience the resident might have experienced in having to make new drawings and complete new forms. Additionally, it did not consider the impact of the delay on the resident, considering it was almost 7 months from when he made his initial alteration request in October 2022.
28. This lack of ownership would have understandably led the resident to lose trust in the landlord and might have led to his reluctance in sending in new forms. It should have provided an explanation to the resident regarding what happened to the previous forms he submitted and provided assurance that it would keep better track of any new forms.
29. Since its stage 2 response, the landlord has acknowledged its failings, however, at the time of its complaint response it failed to apologise, provide an explanation, or offer any redress. We, therefore, find service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for alteration.

Complaint handling

30. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints policy. Stage 1 complaints are responded to within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. Paragraph 6.4 of this Service’s Complaint Handling Code (The Code) states that landlords must decide whether an extension to this timescale is needed when considering the complexity of the complaint and then inform the resident of the expected timescale for response. Any extension must be no more than 10 working days without good reason, and the reason(s) must be clearly explained to the resident.
31. The resident made his complaint on 31 October 2022 and the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 13 April 2023. This was 5 months and 13 days from when he made his initial complaint. Also, its stage 2 response was 3 days outside its complaints policy timescale. There is no evidence to show that it informed him that there would be delays in responding to the complaints or that it requested an extension. Its delays were unreasonable, would have added to the resident’s frustration, and was not in line with its complaints policy timescale.
32. Furthermore, in its complaint responses the landlord failed to acknowledge this failing, apologise for its delayed responses, or demonstrate any learning from the complaints. This Service finds there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

33. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Request for tree maintenance.
    2. Gate alteration requests.
    3. Associated complaint

Orders

34. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay directly to the resident a total of £200 compensation, made up of:
       1. £75 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its failures in its handling of the tree maintenance requests.
       2. £75 for inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its failures in its handling of the alteration requests.
       3. £50 for its complaint handling failures.

Recommendations

35. It is recommended that the landlord supports the resident in making a formal complaint regarding reports of antisocial behaviour.
36. It is recommended that the landlord supports the resident in making a new alteration request application.