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

Orbit Group Limited (202101459)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202101459

Orbit Group Limited

09 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 complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property.

Background

  1. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. The resident is an assured tenant of a 1-bedroom flat owned by the landlord.
  3. The documents provided to our Service indicate that the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord via her local councillor on 20 January 2021. The landlord visited the property on 21 January 2021. It conducted emergency repairs to the electrics and scheduled future works to the roof, guttering and porch. It issued its stage 1 response the same day. It upheld the resident’s complaint due to the emergency electrical work required but stated that there was no evidence of damp or mould inside the property.
  4. The resident did not contact the landlord regarding the stage 1 response. She remained dissatisfied with her property and approached this Service on 19 April 2021 for advice. We wrote to the landlord on 19 April 2021 and informed it the resident had contacted us. We advised the landlord to determine if the resident’s complaint had completed its internal complaints procedure. If it had not, they should contact the resident to discuss any outstanding issues and provide a written response. If the process had been completed the landlord should forward its final response to this service.
  5. The landlord visited the property on 4 May 2021. It found a small patch of mould in the resident’s porch. It issued its final response to the resident on 12 May 2021. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint and advised she should contact our Service if she remained dissatisfied.
  6. The resident submitted another complaint about damp and mould via her local councillor on 13 December 2022. The landlord inspected the property on 12 January 2023. It issued its stage 1 response on 16 January 2023 it did not uphold the complaint.
  7. On 21 February 2023, the resident’s representative brought her complaint to this service. We incorrectly determined that the landlord had issued its final response and accepted the complaint, which we considered duly made on 4 April 2023. We received the landlord’s evidence submissions on 13 December 2023.
  8. The investigation into the case began on 1 February 2024, when it became apparent that a final stage 2 response was not present among the evidence. We contacted the landlord on 10 February 2024 and asked it to provide its stage 2 response. The landlord responded on 27 February 2024, it said that there was no stage 2 response for the complaint. On 29 February 2024 we called the landlord who explained that the resident had not escalated her complaint, it had therefore not issued a stage 2 complaint response. It also said that it did not feel it would be appropriate to issue a stage 2 response at this point due to the time that had passed.

Assessment

  1. Paragraph 42a of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme) states that:
    1. The Ombudsman cannot consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
  2. It was assumed when the case was accepted that the complaint had competed the landlord’s complaints procedure. The error was not discovered until the documents provided on the case began to be assessed at the commencement of our investigation. This Service appreciates that this information should have been identified at the time the resident referred her complaint for investigation. We offer our sincere apologises that this did not happen.
  3. The investigation has indicated that the resident’s complaint did not complete the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. There is no evidence of a complaint handling failure, or of the landlord not acting within a reasonable time.

Decision

  1. After carefully considering all the evidence, I have determined that the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.