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

Sanctuary Housing Association (202307070)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202307070

Sanctuary Housing Association

29 October 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:
    1. Damage to the new kitchen following a leak.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association The property is a 3–bedroom house. It is unknown when the tenancy started as the landlord said it was unable to access a copy of the resident’s tenancy agreement.

Summary of events

  1. The resident had a new kitchen fitted in November 2021. Following this, the resident reported a leak from the floor in the kitchen on 6 December 2021. The landlord repaired the leak on 7 December 2021. The resident reported that the leak and the repairs following the leak caused damage to her kitchen. This included damage to the flooring, skirting boards, the dishwasher and kitchen units.
  2. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 24 October 2022. The resident said that the landlord had damaged the kitchen following its repairs to the leak. This included that it had not reinstalled her dishwasher properly causing it not to be aligned. She complained about inconsistencies in the landlord’s records as it said a contractor caused the damage when it was the landlord. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord apologised for its delay in arranging a meeting to discuss repairs. Additionally, it apologised for its poor complaint handling. The landlord offered £50 in compensation at stage 1 of its complaint process and £750 at stage 2.
  3. In referring the matter to this Service on 21 July 2023, the resident said that repairs remain outstanding. The resident explained that the landlord initially advised her to claim on her insurance which was incorrect as it caused the damage to the kitchen.

Post complaint process

  1. The landlord completed an inspection on 26 September 2024. The inspection found that the vinyl flooring in the kitchen had been poorly laid and needed replacing. Additionally, kitchen units needed an overhaul to ensure they were fixed to the walls. Further to this, the stop tap in the kitchen needed to be reinstalled to ensure access.

Assessment and findings

  1. The Ombudsman’s Dispute resolution principles are to be fair, put things right and 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.
  2. The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns by adhering to relevant legislation, its policies and procedures, and any agreements with the resident, and that the landlord acted, taking account of what is fair in all the circumstances of the case.

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident informed the Ombudsman the landlord’s handling of the matters under review in this investigation had a negative impact on her health and wellbeing. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, we will consider any impact that resulted in distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damage to the new kitchen following a leak

  1. The tenancy agreement required the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes keeping in good repair kitchen units, skirting boards and sinks. This mirrored its repair obligations of section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, that a repair must be completed within a reasonable period of time.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy sets out target times for repairs. This states emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours and routine repairs to be completed within 28 days.
  3. The resident initially reported a leak in the property on 6 December 2021. The records show that the landlord acted promptly in response to the report of a leak and attended the same day. For reasons unknown to this Service the landlord was unable to resolve the leak until the following day on 7 December 2021. At this time, the landlord lifted the wet flooring and left a dehumidifier to dry the flooring to refit the floor the following day. This was reasonable and within its own emergency repair guidelines to establish the cause of the leak and to take an appropriate action.
  4. The next repair record on 29 December 2021 stated that the landlord would investigate the leak on the mains water pipe. However, the record does not go on to say what action, if any was taken. There is a further record on 24 January 2022 which said it had raised a work order to investigate the leak. Again, there is no further information on what plans were in place to investigate the leak.
  5. The records provided to this Service by the landlord point to failures in effective record keeping practices. As part of this investigation, the landlord was requested to provide relevant information that would reasonably be recorded and retained by the landlord. The documentation provided was limited and the repair logs provided did not track its actions or future plans. Due to the lack of records the landlord was unable to have oversight or appropriate measures in place to ensure the repair happened in line with its policy timeframes.
  6. The records show that the landlord arranged to visit the resident on 17 January 2022, however, the resident cancelled the meeting. The resident said she had broken her shoulder and was living at her daughters. She contacted the landlord in May 2022 to rearrange the visit but the landlord did not respond to her. As such, the resident contacted the landlord in August 2022 for an update. There is no evidence that the landlord contacted the resident between May 2022 and 23 August 2022. This was not reasonable as the landlord should have been proactive in establishing what repairs were required following the leak.
  7. Ten months since the resident contacted the landlord regarding the leak in December 2021 the landlord attended the resident’s property on 21 September 2022. The landlord advised her that she would need to claim through her home insurance for the kitchen unit repairs This is not appropriate as the landlord had a responsibility to repair the kitchen units. In October 2022 the resident raised a formal complaint raising further repairs which included that kitchen appliances had been damaged by the leak. Additionally, kitchen units and tiles, skirting boards, the stop cock and lino was damaged.
  8. It was unreasonable for the landlord to wait 10 months to attend the resident’s property. This Service recognises that the resident not being in the property due to an injury was mitigation between January and May 2022. During this time, the landlord was limited in its ability to arrange a suitable appointment to discuss repair issues. Therefore, the landlord cannot be accountable for this period of time. However, this Service has not seen any evidence of why the landlord did not respond to the resident email in May 2022. The landlord missed multiple opportunities to attend the resident’s property between May 2022 and September 2022 to complete timely checks of the property to identify any repairs required following the leak.
  9. There was poor communication on the landlord’s behalf in updating the resident on the progress of works. This left the resident in a position of uncertainty and may have impacted the landlord and tenant relationship. This was not reasonable as it should have full oversight of the matter, contacting relevant teams on a regular basis to seek a resolution. Additionally, providing regular updates to the resident to provide reassurance that it was taking matters seriously.
  10. Following the resident raising reports of repairs in September 2022 after the landlord visited her property, it found that there was low pressure in the water system. The landlord said this was due to the stop cock being nearly closed. It flushed the basin trap and cleaned it. Prior to leaving the property the landlord found water pressure had returned to normal and all appliances worked as expected.
  11. There are clear inconsistencies between the landlord’s records and the resident’s view of the repair matters. This includes that the landlord did not find any issues with the resident’s appliances following the leak. In contrast the resident had reported that the dishwasher no longer worked following the landlord’s repair and was seeking to be reimbursed for the cost of the dishwasher.
  12. The landlord arranged to attend in October 2022 to look at the repair issues raised by the resident. The resident declined the visit as she did not want the previous operative to attend her property. There is no further record of the landlord arranging to attend the resident’s property until August 2023. This was after the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord has confirmed as of October 2024 that the repairs remain outstanding. This is 2 years after the resident raised a formal complaint.
  13. The landlord has provided evidence that it contacted the resident in May 2024 to arrange for the repairs to take place. Additionally, for it to replace the broken dishwasher. This was reasonable as the landlord was proactive at this time to complete repairs and put things right.
  14. This timescale was unreasonable and is outside of the landlord’s own repair obligations to complete repairs within 28 days. This Service has seen evidence that the landlord had sought to arrange for repairs to take place since January 2024. The records show that it contacted the resident on a number of occasions but did not receive a response. Whilst this is mitigation for the delays, this does not discount the delays since the resident raised the matters in 2022. The failings in this case were multiple and prolonged. The landlord repeatedly failed to take action and this negatively affected the resident. The delays to complete repairs were considerable causing the resident distress and uncertainty. For the reasons set out this Service finds maladministration in this case.
  15. The landlord apologised at stage 2 for its delays in repairs between May 2022 and September 2022. The landlord offered the resident compensation of £300 due to the delays. However, the landlord failed to acknowledge the detriment caused to the resident due to the repairs being outstanding.
  16. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests that compensation between £600 to £1,000 should be considered where there has been a severe long-term impact on the resident. The failings by the landlord had a detrimental impact on the resident, its response to the failures exacerbated the situation and further undermined the landlord/tenant relationship. It also repeatedly failed to provide the same service to put things right and learn from outcomes over a significant period of time.
  17. The Ombudsman previously ordered the landlord to carry out a review of its policy or practice under paragraph 54.f in relation to responding to repairs, record keeping and complaint handling. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar to the cases 202224898 and 202216547 already determined. The landlord has demonstrated compliance with our previous wider order so we have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case, which would duplicate those already made to landlord. The landlord itself should consider whether there are any additional issues arising from this later case that require further action.

The associated complaint

  1. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) was introduced with the aim of improving complaint handling across the housing sector. As a member of the Scheme, the landlord is obliged to establish and maintain a complaints procedure in accordance with any good practice recommended by the Ombudsman.
  2. In accordance with its complaint’s procedure, the landlord’s response to residents’ complaints at stage 1 is required within 10 working days of the complaint and the stage 2 response in 20 working days. Where these timescales are not possible, this will be communicated to the resident.
  3. The resident initially complained to the landlord on 24 October 2022, the landlord acknowledged the complaint on 9 November 2022. This was outside of the landlord’s complaint timeframes to acknowledge a complaint within 3 working days. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 9 June 2023. This was not reasonable as it was nearly 8 months after the resident raised her complaint which is outside of its complaint guidelines and our Code. The landlord apologised for its complaint delay at stage 1 and offered compensation of £50.
  4. The resident requested that the landlord progress to stage 2 of its complaint process on 19 June 2023. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 21 July 2023. This was 32 days after the resident requested to progress to stage 2 of the complaint process. The landlord’s delays at stage 2 was minimal but still outside of its complaint guidelines to provide a response within 20 working days.
  5. The landlord has not provided any evidence to explain its delay in issuing its complaint responses nor did it request for an extension. The landlord’s lack of responses was not reasonable. This adversely affected the resident and caused her unnecessary time and trouble requesting a response. Additionally, contributed to the resident’s distress and further exacerbated the situation further. It was also a missed opportunity for the landlord to identify, address and learn from the failings identified above.
  6. The landlord apologised for its stage 1 complaint delay but did not apologise for its delay at stage 2. It offered £400 in compensation for its complaint handling delays at stage 1. This is in line with its compensation guidelines as the delay was high impact causing unnecessary inconvenience. However, as the landlord failed to apologise for its stage 2 complaint response delays it did not put things right. This is not in line with our Code and amounts to a service failure.
  7. This Service orders that the landlord pay the resident compensation to adequately reflect the avoidable inconvenience arising from its complaints handling failings and apologise to the resident for those it previously did not acknowledge.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damage to the new kitchen following a leak
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the associated complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

  1. The landlord is ordered to do the following within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
    1. A senior manager to apologise to the resident for its handling of the resident’s reports of damage to the new kitchen following a leak and poor complaint handling.
    2. Pay the resident £400 compensation in addition to what has already been awarded. This comprises of:
      1. £450 to reflect distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and time and trouble in its handling of the resident’s reports of damage to the new kitchen following a leak.
      2. £50 to reflect its failings in the handling of the resident’s associated complaint.
    3. Within 8 weeks of this report the landlord should contact the resident to establish what repairs are outstanding. The landlord should agree a schedule of works with timescales for completion, this should be shared with the resident and this Service.

 

  1. Provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders.