Tower Hamlets Homes (202320551)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320551

Tower Hamlets Homes

11 April 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 handling of the replacement of the windows at the resident’s property.
2. The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

3. The resident is a secure tenant at the property, which is a 1-bedroom flat in a block. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
4. The resident reported issues with the property’s windows in March 2022. Some windows did not open, and some had missing safety catches. The landlord inspected the windows in March 2022 and again in May 2022. It decided that all the windows in the block needed replacing. The resident was told the landlord would complete this work as part of a major works scheme in 2024-25. The resident’s window replacement was put on hold until that time.
5. In July 2022, the resident complained to the landlord about its decision to delay the replacement of his windows until the major works. He said noise from the windows affected his sleep and caused anxiety. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and the complaint was referred to us.
6. We issued a determination on 2 February 2023 under complaint reference 202214086. In the investigation report, we said that in the circumstances it was appropriate for the landlord to complete the window replacement as part of its major works scheme and to carry out interim repairs. The determination recommended that the landlord invite the resident to provide evidence of his health conditions and vulnerabilities. This was because it may sometimes be appropriate to complete planned works urgently if there is a significant risk to a vulnerable resident. This is in line with the landlord’s Responsive Repairs Policy.
7. On or around 16 March 2023, the resident sent the landlord a letter from his GP to support his request to have his windows replaced sooner. The letter said that noise caused by faulty windows in the resident’s home was affecting his sleep, triggering mental health and other conditions. The letter said it was reasonable to assume improving the resident’s ability to sleep would reduce his symptoms. It asked the landlord to take this into account when assessing his request.
8. On 30 June 2023, the resident complained to the landlord that it had not replaced his windows. He said his neighbour’s windows had recently been replaced and asked the landlord to explain why. During discussions with the landlord about his complaint, the resident said the landlord had not responded to the medical evidence he had sent.
9. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response of 3 July 2023 said that:
   1. Its Capital Delivery Team had not replaced any windows in the block and there were no current plans to renew the block’s windows.
   2. There were several reasons a neighbour’s windows may have been replaced, including health and safety. The landlord said if the resident’s neighbour was a leaseholder they may have replaced their own windows.
   3. The landlord was not familiar with the resident’s previous complaint, and it did not know why the resident was previously told his windows would be replaced.
10. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and escalated his complaint on 3 July 2023. He said it did not explain why a neighbour’s windows were replaced. He said that the landlord had previously ordered the replacement of his windows, but this was cancelled due to the planned works, providing the reference for his previous complaint. The resident said the windows were a health and safety issue for him because of his medical conditions. He reminded the landlord that it had not responded to the medical evidence he had sent.
11. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 2 August 2023. It said:
    1. There could be many reasons a single property had windows replaced but it could not discuss works at other properties due to data protection.
    2. The cancellation of the resident’s window replacement had already been investigated and responded to under the previous complaint reference.
    3. The resident’s block was not scheduled for window renewal but may be included in building safety compliance works in 2025-26. This work may include works to repair or replace windows, subject to further assessment.
    4. The landlord was sorry the resident had not received an update in response to the medical evidence sent in March 2023. As this related to a previous complaint, the landlord would respond to this issue directly by 11 August 2023.

Post-completion of the landlord’s complaints process

12. The complaint was referred to us on 13 September 2023. The resident wants the landlord to replace his windows. The landlord told us it would arrange a joint inspection, taking into account the medical evidence the resident has provided. It also offered the resident £200 compensation. The resident says that he has not received a written response following multiple inspections of the property and the landlord has not taken account of the medical evidence he has provided. 

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

13. Our determination on the resident’s previous complaint considered events up to 22 August 2022, when the landlord provided its final complaint response. We will not normally consider complaints that re-raise matters that the Ombudsman has already decided upon. For that reason, this investigation has not considered the landlord’s actions prior to 22 August 2022.
14. We have investigated the actions taken by the landlord, or any failure to act, since 22 August 2022, including its handling of the resident’s second complaint. This has included looking at the landlord’s response to the resident’s report that his neighbour’s windows had been replaced, the advice given about if/when major works would take place, and the landlord’s handling of the resident’s medical evidence.

Window replacement

15. Our determination of 2 February 2023 found it was appropriate for the landlord to delay the replacement of the resident’s windows until the major works. This was because it had said to the resident that these works were planned for 2024-25. At that time, the resident had not provided any medical evidence of mental or physical health conditions and the possible impact of the delay.
16. We made a recommendation in our determination that the landlord invite the resident to provide medical evidence, as he had said that the noise from the windows was impacting his physical and mental health. This recommendation was not binding but we encourage landlords to follow recommendations to help to resolve issues, improve services and learn from outcomes, in line with our dispute resolution principles.
17. The resident voluntarily provided medical evidence on 16 March 2023. The landlord should have reviewed and responded to this within a reasonable timeframe. The resident states that he has yet to receive a written response, despite it being over 2 years since the information was provided. This is not acceptable, and the landlord should ensure this information is considered and responded to urgently.
18. The landlord’s Responsive Repairs Policy says that vulnerable tenants may need extra consideration and support, but vulnerability does not automatically give a right to a higher priority or a faster response time. The policy also says that sometimes it may be appropriate to postpone “extensive” repairs until an “imminent” planned works programme. However, if the works posed a significant risk to occupants, or vulnerable residents, a director may decide to bring the works forward.
19. It is not clear why the resident was told in August 2022 that major works to replace the windows were planned for 2024-25. The landlord has confirmed that no major works involving window replacement are currently planned. Its stage 1 complaint response said that it did not know why the resident had been given information about major works. This raises concerns about the landlord’s record keeping and the accuracy of the information provided to customers.
20. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to notify the resident if the planned works had been cancelled, as this had been the subject of a previous complaint, and the issue was causing the resident distress and inconvenience. When it became aware that the windows would not be replaced as planned works, the landlord should have re-assessed the repair, considering the resident’s individual circumstances and any medical evidence. It should have considered whether to bring the works forward, or whether there were any interim repairs it could carry out, in line with its Responsive Repairs Policy.
21. In his complaint, the resident asked the landlord why an exception might have been made for another resident but not for him, despite his medical conditions. He felt he had been treated unfairly. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response provided general information about why a single property’s windows may be replaced and its stage 2 response said data protection prevented it from commenting on works to other properties.
22. The Ombudsman cannot give a binding determination on the information the landlord may or may not disclose under data protection law. It was reasonable for the landlord to refuse to comment on works to a neighbouring property, as doing so may have disclosed confidential information about a neighbour’s personal circumstances. Although its decision not to share information was reasonable, the complaint response did not directly address the resident’s concerns about unfair treatment or consider his individual circumstances. The failure to focus on resolving the issue for the resident increased his frustration.
23. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the replacement of the resident’s windows after 22 August 2022. The landlord created uncertainty for the resident and caused further distress by telling him that no works were planned, failing to consider whether any repairs or urgent replacement was required, and failing to respond to his medical evidence. The resident felt that the landlord had not listened to his concerns and not delivered on what was promised.
24. After the complaint was referred to us, the landlord contacted the resident to offer him £200 compensation. It also said it would arrange an inspection for 15 July 2024. It is not known whether the inspection took place on that date, but the resident has referred to multiple inspections without any follow-up.
25. The resident should not need to make a complaint to us for the landlord to carry out a full investigation and to take the necessary action. In the circumstances, compensation of £400 is appropriate. This is to recognise the impact of the unreasonable delays in considering the resident’s medical evidence, and the stress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to plan for the replacement of his windows. This is in line with our remedies guidance.
26. The order for compensation replaces the landlord’s previous offer of £200 compensation. The ordered amount (less any amount already paid by the landlord as part of its previous offer) must be paid within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.
27. In addition to compensation, specific orders are made below that the landlord take action to assess the repairs to or replacement of the resident’s windows, considering his medical evidence and the lack of planned works. The landlord is to write to the resident to inform him of the outcome and the estimated timescales for completing any works.

Complaints handling

28. The landlord’s investigation into the resident’s complaint was inadequate. The purpose of the complaints process is to identify and acknowledge where something has gone wrong and to try to put things right. The landlord’s responses to the resident’s complaint provided information but did not address what the resident was seeking, which was to have his windows replaced.
29. It was inappropriate for the landlord to respond stating that it was not familiar with the previous complaint. As part of the investigation, it should have looked at the history of the resident’s concerns and its repairs records and decided whether it needed to take any action. Its failure to do so made the resident feel that he was not being heard and understood, so he escalated his complaint to stage 2. If the information previously provided to the resident was inaccurate, it should have identified this during the complaints process, apologised and provided redress.
30. At stage 2, the landlord referred to the matters decided under the previous complaint. The landlord had previously sought to address the issues the resident was experiencing with draughts and noise by completing interim repairs. It was clear from the resident’s most recent complaint that these issues had not been resolved. As the landlord was not now planning to replace the windows under a major works scheme, the complaint investigation should have identified the action it needed to take to reassess the windows for any further repairs or urgent replacement.
31. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord should have addressed the resident’s concerns that it had not responded to his medical evidence. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response said it would review the resident’s medical evidence and provide a separate response by 11 August 2023. It apologised for the delay, which was appropriate as the resident had spent a lot of time chasing. The landlord did not provide a reasonable explanation for the long delay as part of its complaint responses. It missed an opportunity to obtain a response from the relevant team and to avoid further delay.
32. There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling. An award of £100 compensation is appropriate to recognise the frustration, stress and inconvenience the resident experienced because the landlord did not adequately investigate his complaint. This is in line with our remedies guidance, which suggests such sums are appropriate where the resident experienced that had a moderate impact.

Determination

33. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the replacement of the property’s windows.
34. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

35. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Write to the resident to:
       1. Inform him of the outcome of its recent inspections, including whether any repairs are required to the windows, or whether they will be replaced. If a further inspection is required, the landlord is to commit to complete this in line with the requirements of its published Repairs Policy.
       2. Explain how the resident’s medical evidence has been considered in reaching its decision.
       3. Provide an estimated timeframe for beginning any required works.
    3. Pay the resident £500 compensation, made up of:
       1. £400 in recognition of the delay and stress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the failings identified in the landlord’s handling of the replacement of his windows. The landlord may deduct any amount already paid to the resident as part of its previous offer from this sum.
       2. £100 in recognition of the stress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the failings identified in the landlord’s complaints handling.

Recommendations

36. It is recommended that the landlord provide training to staff on the Ombudsman’s Complaints Handling Code to ensure complaint responses seek to address a customer’s concerns in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles.