Peabody Trust (202303353)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303353

Peabody Trust

15 April 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s repair requests.
We will also consider the landlord’s complaint handling as part of this assessment.

Background

The resident is the tenant of the property which the complaint concerns. The landlord owns the property.
The property is a 4 bedroom house. The resident’s tenancy commenced in July 2006.
The resident’s daughter makes the complaint on her behalf. The daughter has confirmed that her mother is deaf and finds it difficult to communicate. For ease of reference the daughter’s actions will be referred to as the resident’s in the report.
On 18 March 2022 the resident made a complaint to the landlord regarding the repairs service it had provided. The resident said the landlord had failed to complete repairs in the kitchen, bathroom and to a window. We cannot see that the landlord replied to the complaint.
On 12 January 2023 the resident made a new complaint to the landlord regarding the repairs service it had provided. In summary the resident said:
1. In August 2022 a repair was completed to stop a leak from the shower in the bathroom.
2. During repair works in the kitchen in late September 2022 the contractor identified that the shower was still leaking. The contractor also identified a leak from the sink.
3. On 19 October 2022 a plumber attended the property to inspect the bathroom to identify the repairs needed to resolve the leaks.
4. Following the inspection the landlord had not taken action to stop the leaks by completing repairs. Appointments were made however the contractors had not attended.
5. She had been promised assistance from the repairs team manager however they had not provided any help in resolving the leaks.
On 26 April 2023 the landlord provided its stage 1 response following a call with the resident. In summary the landlord said:
1. Due to the time which had passed since the resident had raised her repair concerns it had requested that its surveyor inspect the property. Any repairs identified would then be carried out. The surveyor would contact the resident directly to make an appointment.
2. It would continue to monitor progress of the repairs while they were outstanding.
3. Once the repairs were completed it would review the resident’s “repair and complaint journey” and consider whether any compensation was due.
On 2 June 2023 the resident responded to the landlord. In summary the resident said:
1. She had not received a copy of the landlord’s stage 1 response in April 2023. She was only made aware of the response after it was shared by her MP, who was assisting her with the complaint, in May 2023.
2. On 18 May 2023 a repair was completed to the sink in the bathroom. The contractor replaced the seal and “put a wooden plank underneath” the sink. Despite the contractor confirming that they would return to complete the repair “in a couple of weeks” they had not d.
3. Other repairs were outstanding. This included faulty radiators throughout the property, faulty lights in the bathroom and all toilets in the property not flushing.
4. Despite the landlord’s stage 1 commitment to monitor the situation this had not happened.
On 7 July 2023 the landlord’s internal records document that the resident wished to escalate the complaint as the repair issues had not been resolved. No further details were recorded.
On 3 August 2023 the landlord provided its stage 2, final, response. In summary the landlord said:
1. It was sorry that the resident had found it difficult to engage with it in relation to the repairs needed to the property.
2. On receipt of the resident’s escalation request it had arranged for its surveyor to contact the resident to arrange a date to inspect the property. The surveyor had contacted the resident on 2 August 2023.
3. From its records it was “unclear” why there had been delays in arranging and completing the necessary repairs to the property.
4. Its records showed that the resident had complained previously about its repairs service in March 2022. It had not responded to the complaint.
5. It had delayed in responding to the complaint at stage 1.
6. It had not kept the resident updated regarding the repairs as it had promised at stage 1.
7. Its repairs team and complaints team were undergoing restructures which would improve the service it provided to its residents.
8. It was sorry for the service which the resident had received. It would like to award the resident £1,100 compensation comprising:
  1. £600 for time, trouble and inconvenience in respect of the repairs service she had experienced. It noted that this was the maximum it was able to offer under its complaint policy.
  2. £250 for not responding to the resident’s complaint dated March 2022.
  3. £150 for the delay in responding at stage 1.
  4. £100 for not providing repair updates following its stage 1 response.
The landlord concluded by confirming that it would monitor the outstanding repairs until completion. It invited the resident to refer her complaint to us if she was unhappy with its response.

Assessment and findings

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

Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord must keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property as well as the installations for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences). These obligations are set out in the tenancy agreement for the property.
A landlord is not liable to carry out any repair until it has been put on notice of the need for repair. The landlord must then carry out the repair within a reasonable time thereafter. As the repairs reported by the resident fell within the repair obligations of the landlord it was required to investigate and to make good any issues identified.
In order to investigate the complaint we asked the landlord to provide copies of its records, repair logs and copies of any surveys relating to the repairs subject of the complaint. While the landlord did provide some information for the period January 2023 to March 2025, the evidence in relation to the repairs under consideration is limited in detail. We note that on 3 August 2023 the landlord confirmed in its internal records that it did not have information on the repairs for the property.
It is unsatisfactory that the landlord has not kept comprehensive records in relation to the repairs subject of the complaint. A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records so that it can satisfy itself and the tenant (and ultimately the Ombudsman if necessary) that it took all responsible steps to meet its obligations.
The evidence does not document any response to the resident’s repair requests by the landlord up until the date of its final response. We can therefore conclude with reasonable confidence that between March 2022 and August 2023 the landlord did not provide an appropriate repair service to the resident. This is because there is no evidence documenting that it investigated or responded to the repair issues which were presented to it. This is unsatisfactory.
Following the landlord’s final response the evidence shows that it inspected the property on 10 August 2023. While this was appropriate, as it was a commitment it had made in order to resolve the complaint, the landlord should have completed this at a much earlier time and immediately following its stage 1 response. This was a missed opportunity by the landlord.
The records relating to the inspection confirmed that repair issues were identified in relation to the electrics throughout the property, the windows, the heating system and the front door. From the evidence we cannot confirm if or when the repairs were completed. This is unsatisfactory and again highlights poor record keeping. We note that the inspection did not reference the leaks or the toilets so it is unclear if these issues were considered as part of the inspection.
In an update to us in March 2025 the landlord confirmed that it “looks like the repairs are still ongoing and [the complaint] is still in progress”. This is supported by the landlord’s repair records dated December 2024 and February 2025 which reference repairs to the bathroom and kitchen. This includes “bathroom basin”, “floor under shower is rotten”, kitchen “damp and mould”, kitchen “remedials” and “window handle replacement”. The resident also informed this Service in March 2025 that the repair issues were ongoing and had not been resolved.
It is unsatisfactory that, despite the resident’s complaints and the inspection in August 2023, the matters are still ongoing and have not been resolved. This is a period of over 3 years since the resident’s first complaint in March 2022. This is a significantly protracted period of time and suggests a lack of oversight and poor management by the landlord. We have not identified any explanation for the landlord’s delay in taking appropriate action to remedy the repair issues raised by the resident. While the repairs have been outstanding the resident will have felt uncertainty and that the her concerns were not being taken seriously. Any repair issues will also have been left open to deterioration and may have got worse while they were outstanding.
In responding to the complaint the landlord acknowledged that the repairs service it had provided had been unsatisfactory. The landlord therefore apologised and awarded the resident £600 in respect of the repair service it had provided.
The landlord’s apology was appropriate to demonstrate that it recognised that the service it had provided the resident had fallen below what was expected and therefore that she had been impacted.
The landlord’s compensation policy sets out that it may award compensation where a customer has experienced a delay or it has failed to carry out a service. As the landlord had identified a service failure it was reasonable that it engaged its compensation policy. In our opinion the landlord’s offer of compensation was proportionate to the circumstances of the complaint for the period up until 3 August 2023, the date of its final response. This is because the offer was within the appropriate range for cases where there were failings which had a significant impact on a resident.
There was maladministration by the landlord in how it responded to the resident’s repair requests. Despite the landlord acknowledging that the repair service it provided to the resident had been unsatisfactory following its complaint investigation it failed to ensure that it took steps to address the outstanding repair issues within a reasonable period of time thereafter.
We consider that a further sum of compensation is due to reflect the shortfalls in service and the missed opportunities by the landlord after August 2023 and up until the date of this determination. This is because following its final response the landlord did not ensure that the necessary repairs were completed promptly and as a result the resident has continued to be adversely impacted.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The evidence shows that the landlord did not respond to the resident’s first complaint, dated March 2022, about the repair service it provided. This is unsatisfactory and a missed opportunity. The purpose of a formal complaint procedure is to address complaints at the earliest stage to ensure that things are put right as soon as possible where it is found that something has gone wrong. The landlord did not do this. The landlord awarded the resident £250 compensation in recognition of its error in not responding to the complaint. In our opinion the offer of compensation was appropriate in recognition of the lost opportunity by the landlord in not responding to the complaint and the resulting impact on the resident
The resident submitted her second complaint on 12 January 2023 and the landlord provided its response on 26 April 2023 which was a period of approximately 73 working days. This was significantly outside of the landlord’s own service standard of 10 working days for responding to complaints at stage 1. The landlord awarded the resident £150 compensation in recognition of the delay in its response. In our opinion the offer of compensation was proportionate to the time that the response was outstanding and the uncertainty that the resident will have experienced.
The landlord provided its stage two response within its 20 working days service standard. This was appropriate.
As part of its stage 1 response the landlord committed to monitoring the situation to ensure that the repairs were completed. Despite the landlord’s commitment the evidence shows this did not happen. This is unsatisfactory. In responding to the complaint the landlord acknowledged that it failed to monitor the situation and failed to keep the resident updated. The landlord therefore awarded £100 compensation in recognition of this. In our opinion the landlord’s offer was reasonable to reflect that it had failed to carry out an action which it had committed to as part of the complaint process.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code sets out that a landlord must provide clear reasons for any decisions made in responding to a complaint. In responding to the complaint the landlord set out that following its investigation it was “unclear” why its repair service had fallen short. It was appropriate that the landlord acknowledged this within its response to demonstrate accountability for its inactions.
While the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s complaint dated March 2022, delayed in issuing its stage 1 response and failed to monitor the repairs, it has since identified and acknowledged its service failure and offered appropriate compensation in recognition of this. The landlord has therefore offered redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves this part of the complaint satisfactorily.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the Ombudsman finds maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s repair requests.
In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord has made an offer of redress to the resident in respect of its complaint handling which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves this part of the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord should, within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, provide a written apology to the resident in respect of the failings identified by this investigation.
The landlord should pay the resident a total of £1,860 compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this determination. This figure comprises the £1,100 which the landlord offered itself in consideration of the complaint, if it has not already been paid, in addition to an extra £760. The additional compensation is in recognition of the failings in the repairs service the landlord provided to the resident after August 2023. Specifically that the landlord did not take steps to ensure that the repairs reported by the resident were investigated and put right within a reasonable period of time.
The landlord should arrange an inspection of the property within 4 weeks of the date of this determination. The inspection should assess the overall condition of the property to identify if any repairs are needed which are its responsibility. Within 2 weeks of the inspection the landlord should write to the resident to confirm the outcome, providing a schedule for any works identified as necessary with provisional timescales. A copy of the letter should be provided to us.
If works are identified following the inspection ordered by the Ombudsman the landlord should provide the resident, and her representative, with a single point of contact to liaise with until all works are signed off.

Recommendations

This report has highlighted a number of failings in relation to the landlord’s record keeping in this case. The landlord should therefore consider the learning from this case and incorporate this and any relate service improvements into its ongoing work around improving its repairs service.