Transform Housing & Support (202217201)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202217201

Transform Housing & Support

16 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise disturbance and requests for sound insulation.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy under an agreement dated 18 March 2019. The landlord is a housing association. The property is a 1 bedroom, first floor flat surrounded by 3 other flats. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
The resident had raised concerns to the landlord about the noise heard through his wall, floor and ceiling from the surrounding flats, since at least May 2021.
On 22 November 2022 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord regarding the lack of sound insulation in the property. He said:
1. he had received no reply to his previous letters raising the issue.
2. he was able to hear conversations from surrounding flats through his wall and floor.
3. he could hear a tenant walking around in the flat above him.
4. the noises continually disturbed his sleep.
5. the ceiling, walls and floor required insulation and sound prevention.
On 7 December 2022 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint. The landlord apologised for the delayed response and informed the resident that someone would contact him as soon as possible.
The resident wrote to the landlord again on 6 February 2023. He said that following previous letters, he was requesting immediate insulation to his ceiling, wall and floor and that the landlord should escalate his complaint to stage 2. The landlord acknowledged this request on 14 February 2023.
On 13 April 2023 the landlord met with the resident. Meeting notes sent to the resident on 10 May 2023 stated that the landlord:
1. offered the resident a permanent move to another property.
2. promised to instruct consultants to investigate the noise issues and see what measures it could install.
3. where any improvements were feasible, it would consider a full specification and invite quotes from contractors.
4. would undertake improvement works, if technically and financially viable.
After receiving contact from the resident, on 7 September 2023 this Service asked the landlord to issue a formal complaint response to the resident. The landlord wrote to the resident on 14 September 2023 and stated that it:
1. acknowledged the resident’s complaint from 22 November 2022 and apologised for providing no response.
2. would treat the complaint as stage 2.
3. had appointed a contractor and apologised for the delays.
On 3 October 2023 the landlord wrote to the resident stating the following:
1. following a meeting with the resident on 15 September 2023, work was now progressing.
2. it would close the complaint.
3. it understood that the resident wanted insulation and sound prevention to the ceiling, walls and floors immediately.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response to the resident on 20 December 2023. The landlord:
1. apologised for the delays and advised that the contractor would supply recommendations and a report in the new year.
2. requested that the resident took the letter as 2 months’ notice for works commencing. It said that the work would likely require a drop insulated ceiling or acoustic underlay.
3. confirmed that it would cover costs for storage of belongings and van hire.
4. agreed to call the resident in the new year to discuss the temporary accommodation.
On 23 January 2024 the resident informed this Service that he was unhappy with the lack of clarity from the landlord about what work it would complete. The resident wanted confirmation of the landlord’s intended repairs. The landlord completed works to install sound insulation in the property during October 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

In correspondence with the Ombudsman, the resident informed us that he was unhappy that after the landlord completed works to the property, 1 wall remained uninsulated. The wall had passed the sound insulation requirements when tested but the resident still wanted it insulated. This matter did not form part of the original complaint brought to us. Accordingly, this investigation will only consider the issues raised in the resident’s complaint to the landlord on 22 November 2022.
The landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions before the involvement of the Ombudsman. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if needed. Therefore, this issue has not been assessed in this report.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise disturbance and requests for sound insulation

The landlord’s Client Handbook states that if a resident has problems with noise from someone else, the resident should speak to the landlord, who will do everything it can to help sort the problem out.
The landlord’s Maintenance Policy states that in most cases, it agrees to keep in good repair, the structure and exterior of the premises, including internal walls, floors and ceilings.
It also states that residents may be entitled to compensation if the landlord fails to carry out a repair to a home quickly enough, and the lack of a repair affects a client’s health, safety or security. If a property needs a repair, then clients have a right to expect the landlord to carry it out within a reasonable time.
If the landlord fails to carry out the repair within the agreed timescales, then residents will be entitled to a maximum of £50 compensation. It lists the response times as:
1. essential: necessary repairs that are neither emergencies nor urgent. 20 working days
2. routine: repairs where special parts are needed. 30 working days.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) lists noise as a potential hazard. This includes threats to physical and mental health from exposure to noise in the home caused by a lack of sufficient sound insulation. It lists inadequate internal insulation as an intolerable cause of noise. The HHSRS states that to determine poor sound insulation, landlords should assess the overlap of domestic noise between dwellings (e.g. toilet flushing / television / conversation).
The resident wrote to the landlord on 25 May 2021 stating that he had reported issues with noise disturbances the year before and had received no response. He said that the noise disturbed his sleep, and that the situation was unacceptable. The resident had completed diary sheets logging noise disturbances between 16 December 2020 and 1 February 2021.
We have seen no evidence that the landlord acknowledged or responded to the resident’s letter dated 25 May 2021. This was a failure in service and would have likely added to the resident’s distress.
On 22 November 2022 the resident reported concerns about noise disturbance in his complaint to the landlord. He described the noises that he could hear from surrounding flats through the wall, ceiling and floor and said that he was losing sleep almost every night. The resident requested that the landlord install insulation and sound prevention measures.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on complaints about repairs (found on our website), highlights the importance of prompt inspection when a resident reports disrepair, to diagnose the cause and initiate repair. Although the landlord acknowledged the complaint on 7 December 2022, this Service has seen no evidence of any further response to the resident’s reports of noise disturbance. This was unreasonable.
On 6 February 2023 the resident wrote to the landlord again. He raised the same concerns about noise as in his original complaint, but this time wanted the complaint escalated to stage 2. Following a site visit on 1 March 2023, the landlord wrote to the resident advising that it now had a better understanding of the noise transfer issues. It said that improvement works would be complex and would require a temporary move of the residents affected.
The landlord explained that it had arranged a meeting for 22 March 2023 to discuss the best course of action. The landlord later invited the resident to a meeting on 13 April 2023 for further discussions on the works. Whilst it was reasonable that the landlord took steps to involve the resident in its decision making, it did not visit the site until 57 working days after it had acknowledged the resident’s complaint. This was unreasonable and not in line with its policy.
On 10 May 2023 the landlord sent the resident notes from the meeting held on 13 April 2023. The landlord said that it would inform the resident once it had agreed on a process. The landlord next wrote to the resident on 26 June 2023, to acknowledge that he had turned down the offer of a move to an alternative property. The landlord also stated that it had obtained quotes and was looking to appoint a contractor.
In its letter on 10 May 2023, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have provided the resident with a time by which it would provide an update. This would have helped manage the resident’s expectations. The landlord took 32 working days to update the resident, which would have likely added to his distress. This was unreasonable.
On 14 September 2023 the landlord apologised to the resident for the delay and advised that it had appointed a contractor. It confirmed a meeting scheduled with the resident for the next day and said it would call the resident the following week. This Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord called the resident. In correspondence with this Service, the resident advised he had not received any further contact from the landlord. The landlord also failed to offer redress for the delays. This was unreasonable and a failure to put things right.
On 3 October 2023 the landlord wrote to the resident. The landlord confirmed its understanding of the resident’s wishes and stated work was progressing. The landlord advised it would contact the resident soon. On 5 October 2023 the landlord carried out a sound insulation investigation which identified 3 areas in the property that fell short of the Building Regulations required standards.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on complaints about repairs states that landlords should agree actions and timescales for responding in line with policies and obligations and confirm these in writing. Whilst it was appropriate that the landlord conducted the tests to investigate the issue, it failed to provide the resident with any action plan or times for updates. This was a failure to manage the resident’s expectations which was unreasonable.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 20 December 2023. It gave the resident 2 months’ notice of the work commencing and agreed to cover any storage and van hire costs. The landlord said that it would contact the resident in the new year, when it was expecting the contractor’s report and recommendations. It advised they could discuss the temporary accommodation during that call. This was reasonable.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord stated that the work would likely require a drop insulated ceiling or acoustic underlay. It had carried out sound insulation investigations on 5 October 2023 which highlighted areas of the property that did not meet Building Regulations required standards. The landlord informed us that it completed works to these areas during October 2024 with no further works outstanding. The resident confirmed that the landlord had completed works in correspondence to us.
Whilst the landlord took action to investigate the issue, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise disturbance and requests for sound insulation. This is because the landlord:
1. failed to respond to the resident’s initial reports of noise disturbance within a reasonable time.
2. failed to comply with its own policy times in acting to investigate the issue.
3. failed to manage the resident’s expectations in its communication with him.
4. failed to contact the resident as agreed.
5. failed to fully acknowledge the failures or offer redress for its delays in investigating the noise disturbance.
The failures identified likely caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. After carefully considering the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, an order for the landlord to pay the resident £300 has been made. We have also recommended that the landlord write to the resident in response to his concerns that the internal wall remains uninsulated.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints procedure, which states it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and it will respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The landlord’s complaint response times mirror our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which sets out good practice for a landlord’s complaint handling practices.
The landlord’s Complaints Procedure states the following:
1. at the completion of each stage of the complaints process, the landlord should communicate with the resident advising them of complaint stage.
2. the landlord’s aim is that its procedures will ensure a full and fair investigation.
3. where something has gone wrong, the landlord will acknowledge this and set out the actions it has already taken, or intends to take, to put things right. Examples of where action to put things right may be required are:
  1. where there was an unreasonable delay.
  2. where the landlord did not correctly follow policy without good reason.
4. this can include providing a financial remedy for factors such as the length of time that a situation has been ongoing.
The resident raised his complaint on 22 November 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 7 December 2022, 11 working days later. The landlord apologised for the delay and explained that as the resident had marked the complaint as private and addressed it to a specific member of staff, the letter had remained unopened due to the staff member being on leave. It was reasonable for the landlord to contact the resident to explain the reason for any delays.
On 6 January 2023 the resident contacted this Service after receiving no further response from the landlord. In accordance with the Code, the landlord should have issued its stage 1 complaint response to the resident by 21 December 2023. The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 13 January 2023 asking it to provide the resident with a complaint response. The landlord failed to provide a response. This was inappropriate.
The resident wrote to the landlord again on 6 February 2023. He raised the same complaint, but this time requested that the landlord escalate it to stage 2. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s letter on 14 February 2023. In accordance with the Code, the landlord should have provided the resident with a stage 2 response no later than 13 March 2023. Although the landlord did contact the resident and took actions to investigate the complaint, it failed to provide a stage 2 response within the appropriate time. This was inappropriate.
On 7 September 2023 this Service contacted the landlord again to request that it issue the resident with a formal complaint response. The landlord wrote to the resident on 14 September 2023, apologising for not providing a stage 1 response. The landlord explained the actions it had taken since acknowledging the resident’s escalation request and stated that it would treat the complaint as stage 2. The Code states that landlords must only escalate a complaint to stage 2 once it has completed stage 1 and at the request of the resident.
This Service contacted the landlord on 21 September 2023 stating that it was unclear if a stage 1 response had been issued. The landlord wrote to the resident on 3 October 2023 with details of the investigation and advised that it would now close the case. The letter failed to address what stage the complaint was at or if it was a stage 1 or 2 response. This was inappropriate and not in line with its complaint procedure.
On 29 November 2023 the resident informed this Service that he did not consider the matter resolved or closed. On 15 November 2023 this Service wrote to the landlord requesting that it send its stage 2 response to the resident no later than 22 December 2023.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response to the resident on 20 December 2023. This was 217 working days after it had acknowledged the resident’s escalation request. In its response, the landlord apologised for the delays and agreed to call the resident in the new year. Whilst the landlord identified the delay, it failed to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to offer redress to put things right, in line with its policy. That it did not, was unreasonable.
It is unclear whether the landlord’s letter on 3 October 2023 was a stage 1 response. The member of staff that sent letter was the same person that sent the stage 2 response. The Code states that the person considering the complaint at stage 2, must not be the same person that considered the complaint at stage 1. If the landlord did consider the letter a stage 1 response, this was a failure to comply with the Code.
If the landlord did not consider the letter to be a stage 1 response, then issuing only a stage 2 complaint response was also not in line with the Code. Furthermore, this Service prompted the landlord to provide a complaint response on 5 separate occasions. Accordingly, the landlord failed to demonstrate compliance with the Code which was unreasonable.
In summary, we have found maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. This is because the landlord:
1. failed to provide a clearly defined stage 1 response within a reasonable time.
2. failed to provide a stage 2 response within a reasonable time.
3. failed to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
4. failed to offer redress for the delays in its complaint responses.
5. failed to identify its lack of compliance with the Code.
6. provided its complaint response after intervention from this Service.
The failures identified likely caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. After carefully considering the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, an order for the landlord to pay the resident £200 has been made.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of noise disturbance and requests for sound insulation.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord should:
1. write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified in this report.
2. pay the resident £500 compensation, which comprises of:
  1. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s concerns about noise disturbance and sound insulation in the property.
  2. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the complaint.
3. write to the resident setting out what it has learned from the failures identified in the report and what actions it will take to prevent the same failures from happening again in the future.
The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with these orders to this Service, within 4 weeks.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord write to the resident in response to his concerns about the internal wall that remains uninsulated.