Sanctuary Housing Association (202303499)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303499

Sanctuary Housing Association

31 July 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

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for reimbursement, for damage caused to his fitted wardrobe during repair works to the property.
We have also considered the landlords handling of the associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident had an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which began in January 2012 and ended in 2023. The property is described as a 2-bedroom ground floor flat. The landlord advised that the resident is diagnosed with some physical and mental health issues. The resident informed this Service in December 2023 that he has since moved to another address.

Scope of investigation

The Ombudsman notes that the resident’s reports about his damaged wardrobe date back to 2018. The evidence shows that the resident reported a leak, and subsequent damage to the internal areas and personal items in 2018. It is noted from the history of the case that the landlord and resident communicated regarding the repairs and worked towards a resolution to the issues raised. The landlord noted that the resident’s claim for damages to the floor, carpets, and underlay, following a leaking boiler was passed to its insurance team.
The landlord’s records also indicate it addressed a complaint from the resident concerning the leak during this period. This Service has not seen communication regarding the complaint, so the issues raised are not known. It is also not clear if the complaint exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process. If it did, the resident should have brought the matter to this Service within 12 months of the date of the final response.
Also, we have not seen evidence of further communication from the resident beyond 2018, in reference to his claim for damages, until 4 April 2022. From the information available to this Service, the resident raised a formal complaint, about the damage to his wardrobe, in October 2022. In accordance with paragraph 42 (c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the historical reports referenced by the resident would not be considered as part of this investigation. This is because residents are expected to raise complaints within a reasonable period, to give their landlord an opportunity to consider issues, while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred. This investigation therefore focusses on events that occurred from 4 April 2022, when the resident requested a repair to his wardrobe. Any reference to the historical events will be for contextual purposes only.
This Service notes the resident’s comments regarding his health and the impact caused by the delays during his complaints. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causations of, or liability for, impact on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim.

Landlord obligations

The tenancy agreement between the landlord and resident states that the landlord shall carry out all repairs, for which it is responsible, within reasonable timescales. The landlord is not responsible for internal decorations.
The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will:
1. Carry out responsive repairs promptly, and in one visit, where possible, and regularly update residents on the progress through proactive communication.
2. Repair or replace a fixture for which it has responsibility.
3. Aim to attend emergency repairs, and make safe the property, within 24 hours of receipt of the repair request.
4. Aim to complete non-emergency repairs within 28 days.
5. Investigate claims for damage to personal belongings through its complaints process, where this is a result of the landlord’s action or inaction.
The landlord has 2-stage complaints handling process. It will aim to acknowledge complaints within 3 working days of receipt, and respond to:
1. Stage 1 complaint within 10 working days
2. Stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
If the resident remains unhappy with the stage 2 response, it will review any further concerns and evidence it has not previously considered and provide a final response. It will not consider issues raised more than 6 months after they occurred, unless there is evidence that it had been raised to staff with no action been taken.
The landlord will offer financial redress on occasions where its service fails or falls below its published standards. It will offer up to £400 in compensation to a resident, for time and trouble and inconvenience, delays or poor responses to complaints.

Summary of events

The resident reported an emergency repair to his built in wardrobe on 4 April 2022. The landlord noted the resident’s concern that the whole unit, including the doors had become loose from the wall. The resident stated that he had managed to secure the unit with a chair, but he was concerned that it would collapse. The landlord raised works with its contractor, who confirmed they could attend on 7 April 2022. The landlord tried to call the resident, but the call was not answered and there was no facility to leave a voice message.
The resident contacted the landlord on 28 April 2022, for an update on the repair.
On 9 May 2022, the landlord enquired internally, if it was responsible for the repair or the resident. The landlord decided that it would repair the wardrobe because it was built in.
The landlord raised works on 23 May 2022, for 2 operatives to attend and take down the large heavy wardrobed, renew the sliding door gear and refix doors back.
The resident chased for updates on the repair in July 2022. The landlord booked an appointment for 20 July 2022 to carry out the repair to the wardrobe.
The resident reported further concerns about the wardrobe on 12 September 2022. The landlord tried to arrange a visit, but the resident said that the operatives who previously attended said wardrobe could not be repaired. The landlord advised that it was not aware of this, and its contractor had confirmed that works were completed in July 2022. It arranged an appointment to attend on 13 September 2022, for make safe works, also agreed with the resident.
The landlord noted that its contractor attended on 16 September 2022, but it was not able to gain access to the property. It closed the repair on the system due to this.
The resident asked for an update on his repair on 19 October 2022.
The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 31 October 2022. He complained that:
1. The landlord damaged his fitted wardrobe when it attended in 2018 to carry out remedial repairs following his reports about a flood.
2. Following his reports, the landlord had sent operatives to the resolve the problem on various occasions, but the repairs were not satisfactory.
3. The landlord attended 2 weeks ago, but the wardrobe doors still fell off their runners and swung open.
4. As the issue had been going on for more than 4 years and the repeated visits had failed to remedy the problem, he would like to reimbursed £800 to cover the cost of the wardrobe. He would also like additional compensation to reflect its failure to repair the wardrobe, for over 4 years, and the stress and anxiety that he had suffered.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 15 November 2022. It said it would look into the issues raised, and contact the resident before 29 November 2022.
The landlord’s complaints team wrote to the resident on 14 December 2022. It requested photos, receipts and evidence of the damage caused to the wardrobe.
The resident provided the information to the landlord on 17 December 2022.
The landlord communicated internally about the resident’s request on 20 December 2022. It noted that the resident wanted confirmation that his receipts and pictures had been received.
The resident requested an update on his complaint on 22 December, 28 December and 29 December 2022.
The landlord sent an interim response to the resident on 29 December 2022. It said:
1. Its contractor attended on 7 April 2022 to survey the wardrobe. Following the initial visit, its contractor did not attend until 20 July 2022 to repair the wardrobe.
2. It attended on 14 September 2022 following the resident’s report, on 12 September 2022, that the wardrobe was still not repaired.
3. The resident should provide the VAT number, for the company he purchased the wardrobe from, as the information was not on the receipt provided.
4. It would contact the resident within 10 working days to provide an update and final response.
The landlord discussed the resident’s complaint, in an internal email, on 3 January 2023. It noted that the incident the resident referenced, in his complaint, occurred over 2 years ago.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 3 January 2023. It said:
1. The resident’s complaint was submitted 4 years and 4 months, after the damage he was reporting occurred.
2. It would like to offer him £50 due to the delay in responding to the complaint.
The resident requested the escalation of his complaint, to stage 2, on 18 January 2023. He said he was not pleased with the landlord’s response to his complaint.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 24 January 2023. It said it would aim to respond within 20 working days.
The resident asked for an update, on the repair to the wardrobe, around 9 February 2023. He advised the landlord that he did not want any further make safe repairs to be completed, as the wardrobe was no longer repairable.
The resident requested an update on his complaint on 15 February 2023. The landlord noted that it attended on 16 September 2022 but was unable to access the property. It further noted that it would ask the resident if he wanted to rearrange the appointment.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 15 February 2023. It said:
1. Under complaints policy and procedure, it was only able to investigate issues which had occurred within six month prior to his complaint being logged. Incidents which occurred before this date would not be considered unless, they were directly related to the complaint that had been made.
2. As the resident had fitted the wardrobe in the bedroom, this was not a repair it would usually take responsibility for. Works were nonetheless raised with its contractor and completed in July 2022.
3. As its contractor was not allowed access on 16 September 2022, the resident should call the repairs line to rearrange the repair.
4. It had partially upheld the complaint in relation to the delay in completing the extra works to the wardrobe.
5. It apologised for the delay in responding to the stage 1 complaint. It would raise this with the relevant manager to improve the level of service.
6. In view of the above it had decided to increase its offer of compensation to £250 as a goodwill gesture. This is broken down as:
  1. Time trouble & Inconvenience £100
  2. Complaint Handling £150
7. The resident was referred to this Service if he wished to pursue the complaint.

Events following the completion of the landlord’s complaints process

The resident and the landlord corresponded by email between 20 February and 21 February 2023. Below is a summary of issues raised:
1. The resident said he was not happy with the landlord’s decision, as it failed to carry out repairs to the wardrobe to a high standard. He said he was unable to raise the complaint earlier, due to covid restrictions.
2. The landlord advised that it would be happy to review any aspects that the resident remained unhappy about. It also reminded him that he could approach this Service for further support.
The landlord provided a follow on response to the resident on 7 March 2023. It said:
1. The resident had a reasonable period of time to report any issues about the wardrobe, because the incident he was reporting took place in 2018. Covid restrictions did not commence until 18 March 2020, and complaints continued throughout the period.
2. It was sorry for any confusion caused when he was asked to provide proof of purchase of the wardrobe. It was appropriate to request this evidence when considering a claim for compensation, but this did not mean his claim would be upheld.
3. As the resident had stated that the damage caused to the wardrobe was not repairable, it would need to attend, to assess this. He would need to contact the repairs team to arrange the inspection.
4. It had reviewed the offer of compensation and increased it to £350. This is broken down into:
  1. Time, Trouble & Inconvenience £150.
  2. Complaint Handling £200.
The resident informed this Service on 3 July 2023 that he wanted a full refund for his wardrobe and compensation for the stress and anxiety caused.
The landlord informed this Service that it dismantled the wardrobe when the resident moved from the property.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are:
1. be fair
2. put things right
3. learn from outcomes.
This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.
According to the landlord’s repairs policy it would not be responsible for internal decorations, as this is resident’s responsibility. While the landlord had not committed to dealing with the historical issues surrounding the resident’s complaint about his wardrobe, it is clear from the evidence that it accepted responsibility for the repairs. We have seen from the landlord’s internal discussions on 9 May 2022, that it agreed to carry out the repairs, because it was a fitted wardrobe. Its reasons remain unclear from the evidence provided, and this should have been clearly explained to the resident from the outset to help manage his expectations. Failure to provide clear reasons for carrying out the repairs to his fitted wardrobe, when its policy goes against this, would have caused the resident some confusion.
The landlord acknowledged it took longer than the timescales published in its repairs policy, to carry out the repairs to the wardrobe. The resident reported the repair on 4 April 2022, but the landlord said its contractor did not complete the repair until 20 July 2022. This would have caused the resident some distress, frustration and time and trouble. This is noted from the number of times he requested an update from the landlord.
In response to further reports about the wardrobe in September 2022, the landlord carried out make safe works and attempted further repairs on 16 September 2022. However, it said the contractor was unable to gain access. Following further concerns raised by the resident on 19 October 2022, the landlord failed to follow up with the contractor to ascertain the condition of the wardrobe. The resident said it was not repairable, so it should have liaised with its contractor to get an up to date condition of the wardrobe.
The resident felt he was led into believing his claim for reimbursement was being considered through the complaints process, when he was asked to provide proof of purchase on 14 December 2022. He was later advised that his request could not be considered due to the time that had elapsed. This would have been confusing for the resident, especially since the landlord had accepted responsibility for the repairs. The resident was left waiting with no resolution from October 2022 to February 2023, when he was advised to raise his repair again. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged there was an initial delay (3 month delay) in completing follow on works to the fitted wardrobe. However it failed to acknowledge the poor communication, lack of transparency and further delays experienced from October 10 2022, to 14 February 2023.
The landlord’s reasons for carrying out the repairs to the resident’s wardrobe is not clear, however, it took responsibility and sought to put things right. It apologised to the resident and offered £100 in compensation, for the inconvenience and time and trouble incurred. However, the landlord advised the resident that he could raise a fresh appointment for further works to the wardrobe. This shows that the landlord was not listening to the resident, or taken his concerns seriously. As the resident had previously advised that numerous attempts to repair the wardrobe had failed, the landlord missed another opportunity to take ownership and proactive steps to address the matter. It should have offered to liaise with its contractor and agree a long lasting resolution to the wardrobe repair, or replacement, if this was an option it would consider. Failure to due to do so, and its advice to the resident to raise the repair again would have caused him further distress, frustration and uncertainty.
The landlord appeared to learn from this after the complaints process had been exhausted. In its follow on response to the resident on 7 March 2023, it advised the resident that its repairs team would need to attend to ascertain if the wardrobe was not repairable. However, it failed to take ownership and advised the resident to telephone its repairs team to arrange the appointment. We have seen that the landlord also increased its offer of compensation from £100 to £150, which shows that it made some attempt to put things right.. However, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the amount offered does not reflect the poor communication, delays and time and trouble experienced by the resident over the 12 months he pursued the matter. It is for this reason that this Service finds service failure, in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for reimbursement for damage caused to his fitted wardrobe, during repair works to the property.

The associated complaint

The landlord’s response to the stage 1 complaint was delayed. It responded approximately 35 working days after the resident raised the complaint. The landlord failed to manage the resident’s expectations. The landlord requested additional information on 14 December 2022 and 29 December 2022, which led the resident to believe that his complaint was being investigated. The resident was left waiting for 3 months, before he was advised on 3 January 2023 that the complaint was out of time. The landlord acted in accordance with its policy by advising the resident it was unable to investigate issues that occurred 4 years ago. However, it should have addressed the resident’s concerns about the repairs to the wardrobe, especially since the landlord had attempted repairs within months of the complaint. This was not appropriate.
The landlord demonstrated some learning from its previous mistakes. It responded to the stage 2 complaint within the timescales stated in its complaints policy. It defined scope of the complaint investigation, and addressed concerns raised about the wardrobe from 4 April 2023. It also offered to carry out further repairs if required. The landlord acknowledged the overall impact of the delays in handling the stage 1 complaint and it offered £150 in compensation for the time and trouble and inconvenience. It also apologised for any confusion caused as a result of the additional evidence requested during the stage 1 response. We have seen that it increased the compensation to £200 in March 2023, when the resident expressed further dissatisfaction. Based on the above, the landlord has offered reasonable redress in its handling of the associated complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for reimbursement, for damage caused to his fitted wardrobe, during repair works to the property.
In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress in its handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord failed to provide clear reasons for why it had decided to repair the resident’s fitted wardrobe, while its policy clearly states it is not its responsibility. It agreed to carry out repairs to the wardrobe, but communication was poor and this led to delays in carrying out the repairs. It apologised and offered compensation to the resident, but it failed to take proactive action in finding a resolution to the matter.
There were delays in handing the resident’s stage 1 complaint. The landlord also failed to provide an adequate response to the issues raised. It learned from this, as the stage 2 response was dealt with in line with its complaint policy. It apologised for the failures identified in the stage 1 response, and offered the resident compensation for the inconvenience caused.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should:
1. Pay the resident £100 for the inconvenience and time and trouble, for the failures identified in its handling of the concerns about the wardrobe.
2. Pay the resident the £350 previously offered, if it has not yet been paid.