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

Stonewater Limited (202325785)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325785

Stonewater Limited

12 June 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the rear external door and windows.
  2. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a joint assured shorthold tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The resident moved into the property with her family via mutual exchange.
  2. The landlord is aware of household vulnerabilities. For the purpose of this investigation, we have referred to both joint tenants as ‘the resident’.
  3. On 20 June 2022 the landlord raised repairs to the resident’s windows. This was completed on 5 July 2022. On 20 July 2022 the resident told the landlord that the windows may need to be replaced. The resident said this was because she was informed of this by contractors and the previous tenant in the property. The resident chased the landlord about this on 9 August 2022. The landlord also raised repairs to the rear external door on 6 September 2022 which were completed on 6 October 2022.
  4. On 10 October 2022 the resident complained to the landlord about the doors and windows in the property. The resident was dissatisfied that the landlord had not provided timescales for window replacement under its programme of works. The resident said she was told prior by its contractors that the landlord would add the windows to its replacement programme. The resident had energy efficiency concerns due to the conditions of the doors and the windows in the property. The resident also said the rear external door was rotten and needed replacing. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on the same day.
  5. The landlord called the resident on 2 November 2022 to update her that its stage 1 complaint response would be sent later than expected. Also, the landlord called the resident on 9 November 2022 to confirm the windows and doors had been added to the programme of works in 2023. The landlord then sent its stage 1 complaint response on 12 November 2022. The landlord said:
    1. That it had told the resident her property was added to its planned replacement programme in 2023.
    2. The resident would be contacted in “early” 2023 to schedule a suitable date and time to carry out the replacement work.
    3. It was awarding £50 in shopping e-vouchers for the delay in letting the resident know about the planned replacement programme and her expending time chasing it for an update.
  6. The resident reported to the landlord issues with the door on 23 January 2023. On the following day, the resident called the landlord for an update regarding the planned replacement programme. Repairs were completed by the landlord on 13 February 2023 for the door.
  7. On 5 April 2023 the landlord’s contractors completed an initial survey of the property with the planned replacement programme in mind. On 24 May 2023 the landlord completed repairs to the window which were identified in the survey of 5 April 2023. The resident then got in touch with the landlord on 1 June 2023, she wanted an update about the planned replacement programme due to the condition of the windows. On 9 June 2023 the landlord’s records say the resident contacted it about her complaint. The landlord noted it had 2-working days to get in touch with her. On 19 June 2023 the resident chased the landlord for an update on her complaint. She told the landlord on this date that she was still experiencing issues with the door letting in rainwater.
  8. The landlord sent a stage 2 acknowledgement letter to the resident on 28 June 2023. On 26 July 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord said:
    1. It was sorry it had not followed up with the resident about the planned replacement programme as stated in its stage 1 complaint response. It attributed this to staff leaving and said it would learn from this to ensure its handover process is followed.
    2. The property was added to the planned replacement programme and her property had already been surveyed. The survey also looked at how to make the resident’s property more energy efficient. The planned works would include replacement windows and doors and other measures which would increase the energy efficiency rating in the property.
    3. The planned replacement works were expected to take 18 to 24-months from April 2023.
    4. It would inspect the door as the resident said the property was flooding every time it rained. It awarded £150 in recognition of the delays in arranging this.
    5. It awarded £200 for its lack of contact with the resident.
    6. It also awarded £200 for the delays at stage 2 of its internal complaints process.
    7. It was recruiting more staff to expand its team to improve communication and its complaint handling. Additionally, it said it wanted to learn from the resident’s complaint, and it was looking to ensure its teams were communicating with each other around planned programme of works.
  9. The landlord said it attended the property to repair the door on 24 August 2023.
  10. The resident first contacted us on 27 October 2023. She wanted us to investigate her complaint because she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. The resident continued to report further issues to the landlord and made subsequent complaints. We were told by the landlord that the planned replacement of the doors and windows were completed in June 2024. It also told us that having reviewed the complaint, it identified that it should have addressed the resident’s concerns about energy efficiency as part of its complaint response.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised in the resident’s formal complaint on 10 October 2022. These issues consisted of the resident’s concerns about the doors and windows of the property, the effect this had on her, and the energy efficiency concerns. These issues exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 26 July 2023. The landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to our involvement. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord.
  2. Additionally, we understand the resident has continued to complain of issues with the door and windows until they were replaced in June 2024. The resident received new complaint responses but has not referred these complaints to us. Therefore, these complaints have not been duly made for us to investigate. As such, we cannot comment on matters beyond 26 July 2023 regarding the doors and windows, aside from the commitments the landlord made in its final response. We can see the landlord committed to inspecting the rear external door in its final response. Therefore, our investigation will consider the resident’s issues until 24 August 2023 when it completed repairs to the rear external door.

Rear external door and windows

  1. We will consider whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles and our Guidance on Remedies. The principles are:
    1. Be fair, treat people fairly, and follow fair processes.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. The tenancy agreement sets out that the landlord is responsible for the structure and exterior of the property. This includes the doors and windows.
  3. The landlord’s Responsive Repairs Policy states emergency repairs are completed in 24-hours. Non-emergency repairs are to be completed in 28-calendar days. For major works, it allows 42-calendar days. The policy also says that the landlord carries out an investment programme to maintain and improve properties.
  4. It is reasonable for a landlord to rely on professional opinion. It is also reasonable for the landlord to attempt repairs rather than arranging a replacement unless the components cannot be repaired, or repairs have not resolved the issue.
  5. The landlord was put on notice on 20 June 2022 that the windows in the property required repairs. The landlord appropriately completed repairs in 15-calendar days on 5 July 2022.
  6. Following this, on 20 July 2022 the resident still reported to the landlord that she was told by its contractors the property’s windows may need to be replaced. In such circumstances, it would be reasonable for the landlord to make enquiries with its contractor to determine if this had been discussed with the resident. However, despite the resident chasing the landlord about this on 9 August 2022, it did not provide her a response or set out its position. This was unreasonable and demonstrates it was not communicating clearly at that stage.
  7. The landlord was aware on 6 September 2022 that there was an issue with the rear external door allowing rainwater into the property. The landlord would have had 28-calendar days to complete repairs under its Responsive Repairs Policy. This repair was not attended to until 30-calendar days after (on 6 October 2022). Although a 2-day delay, this alone would not be a reason we make an adverse finding.
  8. The resident discussed the property’s condition with landlord over the phone on 10 October 2022. The resident said contractors advised that the windows of the property were added to the planned replacement programme but was not advised on timescales. The resident also told the landlord the door also needed replacing, despite the previous repair. The landlord told the resident on 9 November 2022 that her doors and windows would be included in its planned programme of works in 2023. The landlord confirming its position that it would replace the resident’s windows was reasonable at that stage.
  9. The landlord also confirmed in its stage 1 complaint response that the resident would be contacted about the replacement of doors and windows in early 2023. The evidence shows this did not happen. This meant the resident had to chase the landlord about this from 24 January 2023 until 19 June 2023. This was unreasonable as the resident expended time and trouble in chasing the matter.
  10. Additionally, repairs were still needed to the doors and windows in the interim. The resident reported issues with the rear door again on 23 January 2023, which was completed in an appropriate timescale as set out in its Responsive Repairs Policy.
  11. We acknowledge the landlord’s contractors had carried out a survey of the property by 5 April 2023. There is no evidence the landlord explained its position to the resident regarding window replacement around that stage. Repairs to windows were identified in this survey but were not completed until 24 May 2023. This was 21-days over the timescale set out in its Responsive Repairs Policy, therefore inappropriate action by the landlord.
  12. As above, it is clear the landlord had not proactively communicated with the resident or managed her expectations about the planned replacement works. This was despite the landlord concluding in its stage 1 complaint response that it would advise the resident of timescales in early 2023.
  13. The landlord acknowledged this was a failing in its final response and advised that the replacement works would likely take between 18 and 24-months from April 2023. The landlord awarded £200 in compensation for its communication failings about the replacement work. The landlord also identified learning. The landlord said to ensure its contact is better, it was expanding its team, improving internal communication, and ensuring its handover process is followed. While it could have managed the resident’s expectations better, this response was reasonable by the landlord and showed it was willing to put things right and learn from outcomes.
  14. The landlord also responded to the resident’s concerns about energy efficiency due to the condition of the windows and doors. The landlord confirmed the replacement work would improve the energy efficiency rating of the property. However, this was only in its final response, despite being raised during the resident’s initial complaint. We have elaborated on this below in our assessment of the landlord’s complaint handling.
  15. In the landlord’s final response, it also committed to inspecting the resident’s rear door again and carrying out any repairs needed before the replacement programme. The landlord would have been aware from contact with the resident on 19 June 2023 that her issues with the rear external door persisted. The landlord offered £150 in recognition of the delay in organising further repair to the rear external door in its final response. Ultimately, this did not take place until 24 August 2023, which was 38-days over its 28-day timescale set out in its Responsive Repairs Policy. This was a failing and inappropriate action by the landlord. However, it acknowledged the delay and attempted to put things right with its compensation offer.
  16. Overall, the landlord accepted the resident’s windows and doors would be replaced under its planned replacement programme. The landlord has a limited budget and a responsibility to manage its resources effectively. Therefore, the landlord considered what is efficient and appropriate in the circumstances during the resident’s complaint. The landlord acknowledged some of its errors and attempted to put things right and demonstrated learning from outcomes.
  17. However, the landlord did not identify all of its failings. Although the landlord recognised the delay in door repairs in its final response stemming from 19 June 2023, it overlooked previous delays. This investigation found a 21-day delay in repairs which were completed on 24 May 2023. As this was not accounted for by the landlord during its internal complaints procedure, its actions are not sufficient to avoid an adverse finding by us.
  18. Under our Guidance on Remedies, consideration is given for inconvenience caused to a resident by a particular service failure, as well as the severity of the situation, and the length of time involved. 
  19. The total offer of compensation (excluding complaint handling) by the landlord amounted to £400. As above the landlord has not acknowledged all of its failures. As it had not attributed any compensation for the 21-day delay, the offer of £400 was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. We therefore make an order of an additional £100 to recognise the inconvenience caused to the resident by delays. This amount is in line with our Guidance on Remedies for failures which adversely affected the resident.
  20. Based on all the events, there have been failings by the landlord not identified by it. However, we have considered the landlord identified failings, attempted to put things right and learn from outcomes. Were it not for this, we would have found maladministration.
  21. In considering all the above, a finding of service failure has been made for the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the rear external door and windows. The landlord is ordered to offer an additional £100 to the resident for the 21-day delay which it did not identify. This is in addition to the £400 previously offered by it.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy in operation at the time of the resident’s complaint said at stage 1 and stage 2 it would acknowledge complaints within 2 working days. It would then respond to complaints within 10-working days. However, if an extension beyond these timeframes were needed, it would tell the resident.
  2. The landlord appropriately acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its internal complaints procedure the same day she submitted the complaint (10 October 2022). The landlord told the resident it would respond by 24 October 2022. However, the landlord did not provide its stage 1 complaint response until 12 November 2022. This meant 25-working days had elapsed, which was 15-working days over its complaints policy timescales. This was unreasonable.
  3. We can see the landlord did call the resident on 2 November 2022 to apologise about the delay in the stage 1 complaint response. While this was appropriate, there is no evidence it communicated an extension to the resident before its deadline to respond of 24 October 2022. This was therefore not in line with its policy and was unreasonable in the circumstances.
  4. In its phone call of 2 November 2022, it also offered the resident £150 for its complaint handling failings at the time. However, the landlord did not include this compensation award in its written stage 1 complaint response. In the landlord’s complaints policy, it sets out that its responses would acknowledge its failings and how it would put things right. This includes providing compensation. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response omitted any reference to its complaint handling and the compensation it awarded on 2 November 2022. This was inappropriate and not in line with its complaints policy.
  5. We have seen evidence the resident tried to escalate her complaint on 9 June 2023. This was not acknowledged until 28 June 2023. This was 11-working days over its 2-day timescale set out in its complaints policy. Therefore, this was inappropriate action by the landlord.
  6. Further, delays continued as the stage 2 complaint response was not sent until 26 July 2023. This meant it had taken 20-working days from the landlord’s stage 2 complaint acknowledgement. This was inappropriate because the response was sent 10-working days over the landlord’s complaints policy timescales and an extension was not agreed. However, the landlord did acknowledge its failings in the handling of the resident’s complaint at stage 2. The landlord apologised, awarded £200 in compensation and identified learning from the complaint. It said it needed to expand its team and had recruited 2 new members of staff to improve its complaint handling.
  7. While this was positive, the landlord missed the opportunity to identify all of its failings from its stage 1 complaint handling. During the internal complaints procedure, the landlord had not documented in its responses that there were errors in its stage 1 complaint handling. This was unreasonable.
  8. The landlord told us in 2024 that it should have provided a clearer response to the resident’s concerns about the energy efficiency and how she is being affected by condition of the windows and doors. While we can see a response was provided at stage 2 that referenced this, it did not answer this at stage 1. This was unfair to the resident who raised this concern on 10 October 2022. This meant she was not provided with a response about the matter until she escalated her complaint, which was unreasonable. However, we have taken into consideration that the resident did not express dissatisfaction with the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response until nearly 7 months after. Ultimately, it should not have taken our involvement for the landlord to realise this.
  9. It is clear the landlord attempted to put things right and learn from outcomes by its final response. The total award of £350 is in line with our Guidance on Remedies and is reflective of the total length that the resident’s complaint journey was affected. However, as above, there have been omissions in its complaint handling which were not identified by its final response. If it were not for its attempt to put things right, award of £350 compensation for complaint handling, and evidence it has learned from outcomes, we would have found maladministration.
  10. However, considering all the above, a finding of service failure has been made for the landlord’s complaint handling. No additional financial order will be made. This is because its total compensation offer was proportionate to the events. Instead, the total offer made for complaint handling of £350 has been made an order, if not paid already.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the rear external door and windows.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must pay the resident £450 in compensation. This is made up of:
    1. £100 for the inconvenience caused to the resident by the delays in repairs as identified in this report. This offer is in addition to the £400 already paid to the resident (excluding complaint handling). The £400 previously offered consists of:
      1. £50 offered in its stage 1 complaint response of 12 November 2022.
      2. £350 offered in its stage 2 complaint response of 26 July 2023.
    2. £350 for the delays in the landlord’s complaint handling. This is comprised from:
      1. £150 offered in its phone call with the resident on 2 November 2022 for its failings at stage 1 of its internal complaints procedure.
      2. £200 offered in its stage 2 complaint response for the failures it identified at stage 2.
  2. The landlord is ordered to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to us.