Southern Housing Group Limited (202107885)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202107885
Southern Housing Group Limited
11 February 2022
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 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:
- repairs to the resident’s shower.
- the associated complaint.
Background and summary of events
Background
2. The resident is a tenant and lives in a flat of the landlord’s.
Summary of Events
3. The resident rang the landlord on 28 January 2021 requesting that the shower be reconnected to the electricity supply, as an electrician had cut the cable on a previous visit and left her without a shower and only a small hose attached to the bath taps to wash with. The landlord said that the request would be initiated immediately but it was not booked until 5 February 2021.
4. An internal landlord email on 30 January 2021 stated the resident said there had been a smell coming from the shower, the contractor’s operative did not have the necessary tools to repair the fault, and consequently had to cut the cable as this was a safety issue.
5. The resident rang the landlord to chase the repair on 1 February 2021, and the landlord replied on 4 February 2021 advising that the contractors would contact her directly with appointment details.
6. The resident requested an update on the repair on 26 February 2021, which led the landlord to request an update from its contractor. The contractor confirmed that two visits to the resident’s property had taken place: one on 8 February 2021, in which the operative concluded that a friend of the resident had cut the feed cable to the shower isolator and removed the cover from the shower; and the other on 16 February 2021, which found that the cover on the fuse box would not close properly, and that new trunking needed to be provided because another circuit could not be legally added to the existing fuse box.
7. The resident rang the landlord on 1 March 2021 and requested compensation because she had been without a working shower for nearly two months.
8. The landlord raised a job to install the new shower and replace the 6mm feed cable on 3 March 2021.
9. The resident then said that she made several further calls (the landlord did not provide records of these) and was told that the repair was in hand and that she would be advised of the appointment date, yet she received no reply.
10. The resident’s son then contacted the landlord, which said it would escalate the issue and advised him to call the repair centre again. This did not result in an appointment being made. The landlord rang the resident on 12 March 2021 to advise that an appointment had been made for the “20 (something) March”. The resident did not capture the full details, rang the landlord on 16 March 2021 to confirm the appointment date, and was told that no appointment had been booked. The landlord texted later on 16 March 2021 to confirm the appointment for 24 and 25 March 2021 as previously advised.
11. The resident made a stage one complaint via the landlord’s website on 18 March 2021 about the delay in fixing the shower. She explained that one of the landlord’s operatives had disconnected her electric shower on 20 January 2021 (this date does not appear in the landlord’s records so it is unclear exactly what was reported on this day) because the supply needed moving, but she was not given a date as to when it would be re-connected
12. The resident requested on 18 March 2021 that, as the landlord failed to complete an essential repair in a timely manner, failed to contact her when promised, and had not adhered to its policies as laid out in its tenants and residents handbook, she be compensated with two months’ rent for not having a working shower,
13. The complaint email referred to above was also sent to the landlord on 19 and 23 March 2021. The resident mentioned that she and her had son accident on 17 February 2021, which made using the bath impossible.
14. The landlord responded to the resident on 22 March 2021 apologising for the delay in carrying out the repair, promising to escalate the matter, and advising the resident of her options should she wish to make a formal complaint. It noted that any compensation would be considered once the repair had been completed.
15. The resident rang the landlord advising that she would withhold rent until the complaint was resolved. The landlord advised against this.
16. The resident sent the landlord another email, which she also wished to be regarded as a formal complaint on 23 March 2021. She complained about being without a shower since 20 January 2021, as well as the landlord’s failure to provide promised call backs and to respond to emails. This was acknowledged by the landlord on 25 March 2021.
17. The landlord’s records show that the new shower was installed on 25 March 2021, but that there was some outstanding electrical work to be completed on 19 April 2021. This appointment had been confirmed with the resident. This delay was, in part, caused by a temporary repair having to be done because electrical work carried out by the resident which the contractor believed to be unsafe.
18. The resident contacted the landlord a further nine times between 12 April and 22 June 2021 urging settlement of her compensation claim
19. The work scheduled for 19 April 2021 was not completed until 13 May 2021, no explanation was provided at the time by either the landlord or the contractor for the delay.
20. The landlord offered £50 compensation in its stage one complaint response of 22 June 2021, on the basis that there were delays in carrying out the repair, which was raised in February and not competed until May 2021. This was rejected by the resident on 25 June 2021.
21. On 6 July 2021, the landlord increased its compensation offer to £100 for delayed repairs and in recognition of the poor service she had received.
22. The resident escalated the complaint to the final stage of the complaints procedure on 31 July 2021. This was acknowledged by the landlord on 2 September 2021.
23. The landlord issued its final stage complaint response following a compensation review on 6 September 2021 and increased its compensation offer to £200, which would be credited to the resident’s rent account if accepted due to the outstanding arrears balance on the account. This was broken down into £50 for its delays and failure to complete the repair, £50 for her loss of use of a shower facility while it understood that a bathing facility was present at that time, £25 for its missed/failed appointments, and a £75 discretionary payment for the inconvenience caused.
24. The landlord explained that this was because of delays in rebooking a further repair appointment, sourcing the shower that needed to be installed during the appointment, the corona virus pandemic affecting these and causing a lack of operatives and a need for safe working systems. It added, however, that there were also delays caused by other parties having cut the supply cable to the shower and removed the cover, and by its contractor being unable to complete repairs and fully test the shower on 25 March 2021, as some of the doors in the resident’s property were locked.
25. The resident emailed the landlord on 13 September 2021 rejecting the compensation offer. She believed that it was inadequate because the landlord admitted service failures and delays in rebooking appointments. The compensation offered was also much less than the resident’s rent arrears, which she said had been accumulated due to the landlord’s lack of contact and support for her.
26. Following mediation arranged by the Ombudsman, the landlord offered to increase its compensation award to £300, made up of the offer made on 6 September 2021 plus an additional £100 for poor complaint handling. The landlord also issued an apology for poor complaint handling to the resident on 26 October 2021.
27. The resident nevertheless complained to this Service that the compensation awarded by the landlord was too little, and that she was seeking £1,000 to £4,000 compensation for reasons including her hair loss and tinnitus as a result of stress, and her and her son’s accident causing them difficulty bathing, so that they had to shower at a friend’s house.
Assessment and findings
Scope of Investigation
28. The resident mentioned in her complaint that the stress caused by the repair delay was responsible for tinnitus and hair loss. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding her medical condition, however this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way that a court or insurer might. Nevertheless, we have considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation has caused the resident.
Policies and Procedures
29. The landlord is responsible for maintaining “any installations we provide for space heating, water heating and sanitation and installations for the supply of water, gas and electricity” under its responsive repairs policy.
30. The responsive repairs policy provides for emergency repairs to be completed or made safe within 24 hours of being notified. There is no timescale set out for other repairs, but the Ombudsman would normally expect such repairs to be completed within 28 days in line with industry best practice.
31. The landlord’s complaints policy provides for an acknowledgment of a stage one complaint within one working day of it being reported, and a response within 10 working days. If this does not prove to be possible, the landlord should contact the resident to explain why. The response should then be provided within the next 10 working days.
32. If the resident is not satisfied with the stage one response, they have 20 working days to escalate to stage two, which provides for a response for a compensation review within 10 working days. If this does not prove to be possible, the landlord should contact the resident to explain why. The response should then be provided within the next 10 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.
33. The landlord’s compensation framework permits it to offer its residents up to £50 for delays or failures by it to complete repairs, up to £50 for their loss of hot water facilities, and up to £25 for its missed or failed appointments. It is also permitted to award up to £50 for unquantifiable losses such as distress and inconvenience arising from its single or multiple service failures, and an unspecified amount of discretionary compensation.
The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s shower
34. It is not disputed that there were delays in completing the repair to the resident’s shower. The resident first raised the issue in late January 2021 and the repair was not fully completed until mid-May 2021, which was far in excess of the expected timeframe in which to complete a routine repair of 28 days. The landlord has also acknowledged that there were failures in its communication.
35. The landlord should have logged the request to reconnect the shower cable to the electricity supply on to its system after the resident’s call of 28 January 2021, but it did not do so until 5 February 2021 and did not provide an explanation for this. When the repair was logged, after the resident had chased it, the landlord appropriately classified it as a routine repair, as the fault did not pose an immediate risk to safety, security or health and the resident had access to a working bath in the property. Although the only method of showering was by using a hose attached to the bath tap, which the resident advised the landlord was uncomfortable in an email on 1 February 2021.
36. The landlord subsequently acted promptly and in line with its repairs policy by arranging visits to the resident’s property on 8 and 16 February 2021. However, these visits identified additional work to be done, which would involve having to source spare parts.
37. Following this, the landlord should have kept the resident regularly updated, but it did not contact her again until 12 March 2021 to advise of appointment dates of 24 and 25 March 2021. This was within the expected timescale for a routine repair, and was therefore a reasonable response by the landlord.
38. When the landlord became aware on 19 March 201 that the resident was unable to use the bath, it should have treated the repair with a greater degree of urgency.
39. The resident believed that the repair was fully completed on 25 March 2021, and questioned receiving a text from the contractors advising her of a further appointment scheduled for 19 April 2021. The contractor should have advised the resident that there was still work to carry out, particularly given the resident’s dissatisfaction with the handling of the repair.
40. Lastly, the work was completed on 13 May 2021 and not on 19 April 2021 as originally scheduled. The landlord should have provided an explanation and an apology for the delay, but this was not forthcoming at the time.
41. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In this case, the landlord did put matters right by completing the repair, and providing proportionate compensation which took into consideration the length of the delays, the loss of the shower facility, and the poor communication.
42. This was reasonable because the resident was without access to a shower from 28 January until 25 March 2021. There were, however, factors contributing to the delay, which were beyond the landlord’s control and which have been taken into consideration. These included problems obtaining a new shower, staffing issues caused by Covid 19, having to make a temporary fix to a DIY repair that had been carried out, the need to have new trunking provided, and problems accessing part of the resident’s property due to locked doors, which delayed full testing of the new shower. The resident also had access to bathing facilities while the shower was out of order. That said, the landlord accepted that, despite there being factors beyond its immediate control that resulted in delays to the repair process, it should have been completed more quickly than it was.
43. The compensation offered by the landlord in its final stage complaint response of £50 for delayed repair, £50 for loss of the use of the shower, £25 for failed/missed appointments was the maximum payable under its compensation framework policy. The discretionary payment for inconvenience is not subject to an upper limit, and the payment of £75 can be considered reasonable under the circumstances.
44. This is also in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which would normally suggest compensation of between £50 and £250 where the Ombudsman has found “instances of service failure resulting in some impact on the complainant”. This would include “failure to meet service standards for actions and responses”. The impact could include “distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved”.
45. In view of this, the landlord has provided reasonable redress to satisfactorily resolve this aspect of the complaint.
46. The resident initially wanted the landlord to offer her two months’ rent as compensation for loss of the shower. Residents would be expected to keep paying rent during an ongoing repair issue and, if compensation was deemed to be appropriate, it would be awarded after the completion of the repair. The landlord did advise the resident not to withhold rent, as paying rent is a condition of tenancy, and it had tried to persuade the resident to resume paying rent on two occasions.
47. The property would not be considered uninhabitable, even though the shower was not working, and therefore the resident would not be entitled to a rent rebate under these circumstances. However, the landlord’s compensation framework allows for a maximum £50 payment for unquantifiable losses, such as inconvenience and stress arising from multiple service failures and failure to follow policy and procedure, and therefore a rent rebate would not be appropriate.
48. If the resident was experiencing financial difficulties, she would be encouraged to make the landlord aware of this, and the landlord would be expected to offer her appropriate support in line with its policy for managing rent arrears.
The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint
49. The resident initially completed a complaint form on the landlord’s website on 18 March 2021, and also re-sent the same email on 19 and 23 March 2021. The landlord acted unreasonably by treating the 23 March 2021 rather than the 18 March 2021 email as the official logging of the complaint, and therefore failed to log the resident’s complaint at the earliest opportunity.
50. The stage one complaint response was not issued until 22 June 2021, 61 working days after the landlord logged the complaint, and therefore was a significant breach of the landlord’s policy of providing a response within 10 working days.
51. The landlord acted reasonably in suggesting to the resident that she escalated her complaint to the final stage of its complaints procedure on 30 July 2021, when it became aware of the resident’s dissatisfaction with the stage one response. The resident formally requested this on the following day, although the landlord did not formally acknowledge this until 2 September 2021, 22 working days after the complaint was escalated and it did not offer an explanation or apology for this delay at the time.
52. The resident rejected the landlord’s stage two compensation offer and sought assistance from this Service. Following this Service’s intervention, the landlord and resident agreed to mediation, which resulted in the landlord increasing its compensation offer by £100, specifically for poor complaint handling.
53. Although discretionary payments do not have an upper limit in the landlord’s compensation framework, this offer is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. This would suggest a payment of between £50 and £250, where “service failure had an impact on the complainant but may not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the complainant”. This would include “failure to meet service standards for actions and responses “ resulting in “distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved”
Determination (decision)
55. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of the associated complaint satisfactorily.
56. These decisions are dependent on the landlord following the below recommendations.
Reasons
58. The landlord failed to log the complaint at the earliest opportunity, the stage one and final stage complaint responses were not provided within the landlord’s published timescales, and there were several instances of customer contact not being followed up. Although it apologised for this, and it also awarded the resident compensation for its poor complaint handling that was in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance and its own compensation framework, which satisfactorily resolved this complaint.
Recommendations
59. It is recommended that the landlord:
- Re-offer the previous award of £300 compensation that it made to the resident, unless this has already been paid to her.
- Consider revising its responsive repairs policy with the inclusion of a target timescale to complete routine repairs, to ensure consistency and make it easier to identify if a repair is taking longer than it should.
60. The landlord should contact this Service within four weeks to confirm whether it has followed the above recommendations.