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

Regenda Limited (202220342)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220342

Regenda Limited

21 May 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the temperature of her property and a front door replacement.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The tenancy started in September 1994. The landlord is aware the resident has arthritis.
  2. The resident made a complaint via a councillor on 3 November 2022. She said:
    1. Earlier in the year she asked the landlord to survey the property due to how cold it was.
    2. She was still waiting for the landlord to replace her front door and it informed her this was on hold.
    3. Cold and draughts impact her health difficulties. This was also affecting her mental health.
  3. The landlord said it responded to the resident and councillor on 11 November 2022. Within its email to the councillor, it said:
    1. It had contacted the resident to apologise for the lack of communication regarding the replacement front door.
    2. It would make an appointment with the resident by 17 November 2022 to remeasure the front door.
    3. The replacement rear door and works to the windows had been completed.
  4. Following the response to the councillor, the landlord’s records show it closed the resident’s complaint.
  5. The landlord measured the resident’s door on 21 November 2022 and confirmed her choice of door on 28 November 2022. Records show the landlord sent the door order to the manufacturer on 1 December 2022 and informed the resident it would take 6 to 8 weeks to produce. At this time, the resident informed the landlord that her property was still cold, and her windows were full of mould and condensation.
  6. The resident spoke to this Service on 28 April 2023. She said she felt a response was overdue from her landlord. We contacted the landlord and asked it to respond directly to its resident.
  7. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 25 May 2023. It said:
    1. It attempted to contact the resident on her previous telephone number in January 2023 to arrange a heating survey. It failed to follow up with the resident when it was unable to reach her.
    2. It addressed its mistake with the head of services to ensure the team were aware of the correct processes when scheduling work with a resident.
    3. A heating survey took place on 18 May 2023. Following this, it agreed to replace radiators in the hall, downstairs toilet, dining room, kitchen, front main bedroom, bathroom, and back bedroom.
    4. It inspected the windows in the property on 25 May 2023. Following this, it would raise a recall order to replace handles and gaskets to all windows and fit trims and internally seal all windows.
    5. It would provide dates to carry out the above works by 31 May 2023.
    6. It offered £250 to reflect the delay in arranging the heating survey and any inconvenience caused.

Events after the end of the internal complaint process

  1. The landlord informed this Service that it replaced 7 single radiators with 7 double radiators in June 2023.
  2. The landlord’s head of asset delivery met with the resident on 20 March 2024 to discuss the history of her complaint. It arranged for a further review of the heating as they felt a radiator may still be undersized.
  3. On 15 May 2024, the resident told this Service that the landlord had completed some works to the windows and replaced radiators in the bedrooms.
  4. The landlord confirmed the resident’s property was on its window replacement scheme for the 2024/2025 financial year. The resident said the landlord had attended to measure for replacement windows.
  5. To date, the resident said she cannot confirm if the works completed has helped with coldness/draughts within the property until there is cold weather.

Assessment and findings

  1. When a landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
  2. In investigating this, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.

Relevant policies, procedures, and laws

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. The HHSRS considers excess cold a hazard.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states it is responsible for the external structure of the building including, foundations, outside walls, roofs, windows, and doors. It is also responsible for internal services including plumbing, heating, and hot water.
  3. The landlord aims to respond to non-emergency repairs within 60 days. Where a repair requires extensive further works or the replacement of components, such as doors or windows, it could be a further 60 days or longer to complete.
  4. The landlord has a discretionary compensation policy which sets out that it may offer compensation when its residents are impacted by a service failure, for example poor complaint handling, delays in providing a service, personal inconvenience and unreasonable time taken to resolve a situation.
  5. The landlord’s customer feedback policy sets out a 2-stage complaint process ‘first time resolution’ and ‘final resolution’. It acknowledges a ‘first time resolution’ within 2 working days and a response sent to the resident within 5 working days. It responds to a ‘final resolution’ within 15 working days.

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident explained the situation affected her health. The Ombudsman empathises with the resident. However, as this Service is an informal alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can we calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider this aspect of the resident’s complaint. These matters are better suited for consideration by a court or a personal injury claim. Nonetheless, the Ombudsman has considered the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident.
  2. The resident told this Service she was dissatisfied with how the landlord handled her reports of damp, mould, and window repairs within her home. This Service is bound by the rules of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. Paragraph 41 (a) states we may not consider a complaint which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, is made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure.
  3. The resident’s concerns about damp, mould and windows within her property was not mentioned in the complaint dated 3 November 2022. Nor was this considered by the landlord within its complaint response. Therefore, the Ombudsman will not consider this matter within this report.
  4. The Ombudsman recognises the resident provided an excerpt of a ‘first time resolution’ complaint response from the landlord dated 13 June 2022 (landlord reference 6123404) which states a cold inspection took place on 7 April 2022. Neither party provided a stage 2/final resolution for this complaint to evidence it completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. As such, any reference to complaint 6123404 is for context only.
  5. This adjudication considers the complaint made to the landlord in November 2022 and its final complaint response dated 25 May 2023 (landlord reference 6376811).

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the temperature of her property and a front door replacement

  1. The resident evidenced that she had previously reported cold temperatures within her property to the landlord. The landlord’s response from her previous complaint refers to a survey taking place in April 2022. The landlord has not evidenced the outcome from its previous investigation into the substantive issue or what actions it took as a result.
  2. As the resident had reported the same concern a few months later, it should have put the landlord on notice that the cold temperatures within the property reported again on 3 November 2022 (following the resident’s previous complaint) required active management.
  3. The landlord’s internal records evidence show it measured the resident’s door on 21 November 2022 and confirmed her choice of door on 28 November 2022. The same day, the landlord ordered it from the manufacturer and informed the resident it would take 6 to 8 weeks to produce. Records show it told the resident there may be a delay in production over the festive period. The landlord installed the replacement door on 8 February 2023. Overall, the Ombudsman finds the landlord acted in line with its repair policy. It also managed the resident’s expectations satisfactorily here.
  4. The resident told the landlord on 12 December 2022 she was struggling financially to keep the property warm, and it was affecting her health due to her arthritis. She also said it was impacting her mental health. 3 days later, the landlord gave her a fuel voucher and a food voucher. This demonstrates it listened to the resident and acted suitably in the short term to provide financial support. However, it took a further 2 weeks for the landlord to chase its surveyor and gas team for a heating survey. This delayed the resolution of the substantive issue.
  5. Within its final complaint response, the landlord said its gas team tried to contact the resident in January 2023 to arrange the heating survey, but it used her old number and failed to follow up when it was unable to reach her. It was a significant failing that the landlord did not contact the resident again about the heating survey until 2 May 2023 – more than 25 weeks after her complaint in November 2023 – despite further contact from her. This shows the landlord failed to give the resident’s concern the appropriate attention in the circumstances, considering she had already made a previous complaint about the low temperature within her property.
  6. Following the heating survey on 18 May 2023, the landlord decided to replace 7 radiators within the property. The Ombudsman finds the landlord completed these works within a reasonable timescale after the survey, in line with its repair policy.
  7. Within its complaint response, the landlord demonstrated that it investigated the resident’s concerns and identified the reason why the heating survey did not initially take place as promised. It was appropriate for the landlord to apologise for the failing identified, offer compensation, and set out the steps to remedy the outstanding issues with defined timescales.
  8. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (available on our website) sets out that compensation awards of over £100 are appropriate where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident. In the Ombudsman’s view, the £250 compensation provided by the landlord was in accordance with our guidance for the landlord’s failures. This sum was also in line with its own compensation policy. As such, the landlord offered appropriate redress at the time it issued its final complaint response.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (“the Code”) is applicable to all member landlords. It specifies a stage 1 complaint should be finalised in 10 working days from the acknowledgement of the complaint, with no more than a further extension of 10 working days. A stage 2 complaint should be finalised within 20 working days from the acknowledgement of the complaint, with a further extension of 10 working days if required. A landlord should not exceed these timescales without good reason.
  2. In this case, the landlord’s records show it raised a complaint following contact from a councillor. However, it closed the complaint without issuing a stage 1 complaint response or a complaint acknowledgment to the resident. Instead, records show it called the resident and emailed the councillor informally. The landlord’s action here was not in line with its own policy or the Code.
  3. The landlord’s failure to acknowledge the complaint at stage 1 meant the resident was unaware it had treated the councillor’s email dated 3 November 2022 as a complaint. It is unclear from the call records available whether the landlord gave the resident an opportunity to provide further comments or evidence for it to consider within this complaint, or what information it provided to her about its complaints process.
  4. While the Ombudsman recognises the landlord contacted the resident to arrange a replacement door, the landlord’s omission in issuing a stage 1 response meant it missed opportunities to formally address the resident’s concerns and improve the landlord/resident relationship. Additionally, the landlord did not tell the resident about her right to escalate her complaint to the final stage in its procedure or consider what had happened following her previous complaint about similar issues. This was fundamentally against the dispute resolution principles, “be fair”, “put things right” and “learn from outcomes”.
  5. The resident received 1 written response to her complaint at the ‘final resolution’ stage (stage 2). In only providing 1 response to the complaint, the landlord did not allow sufficient opportunity for the resident to respond to the landlord’s position. This was inappropriate and unjust.
  6. The landlord acknowledged its failure in not issuing a stage 1 response within its submission to this Service and outlined improvements it had made to its complaints provision. While the Ombudsman values the landlord’s reflections and learning from this case, in the circumstances, the Ombudsman finds the landlord ought to have considered its own complaint handling at stage 2, and the subsequent impact on the resident.
  7. The Ombudsman notes that the complaint policy provided to this Service by the landlord is not fully compliant with the Code. In view of the publication of an updated Code in February 2024, we require all landlords to complete a self-assessment. We are engaging with landlords to complete this outside of any individual complaint. Therefore, the Ombudsman has not ordered a self-assessment or a policy review within this determination.
  8. Overall, the Ombudsman concludes there were failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. Due to the issues identified, the length of time this occurred for, and the detriment experienced by the resident, the Ombudsman finds maladministration.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the temperature of her property and a front door replacement.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handing of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the complaint handling failures identified. 
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above order to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord pays the resident the £250 compensation it previously offered (if it has not yet done so). The finding of reasonable redress is on the basis that this payment is made to the resident.