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

Vivid Housing Limited (202316020)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202316020

Vivid Housing Limited

29 January 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:
    1. Handling of repairs following a leak.
    2. Response to the resident’s concerns raised in relation to:
      1. Her fridge-freezer.
      2. Staff conduct.
      3. Extractor fans.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord which is a housing association. The property is a 4-bedroom house.
  2. The resident reported leaks from her bathroom on 1 and 3 January 2023. The landlord attended and fixed the leaks. However, the resident remained unhappy with its handling of subsequent repairs. She raised complaints on 5 April 2023 and 19 May 2023 (which the landlord noted it resolved at first point of contact), and 16 June 2023.
  3. The landlord upheld the complaint and sent its stage 1 response on 30 June 2023, as follows:
    1. In relation to the leak it said:
      1. It attended and made the electrics safe on 1 January 2023.
      2. It replaced the leaking toilet fill valve on 3 January 2023 after the resident said there was still a leak.
    2. In relation to repairs, it said:
      1. It had arranged for a repairs supervisor to visit the property on 3 July 2023 to look at the works required. After the visit it could clarify required works and ensure all work orders have been raised and appointments arranged.
      2. It is not responsible for internal decoration, which included filling small cracks or holes.
      3. It is responsible for more major plaster repairs and will leave the area ready for decoration.
      4. It provided details of the repairs raised and scheduled appointments.
    3. It said claims for damaged personal belongings (fridge-freezer) should be made on the residents home contents insurance.
    4. An appointment for the extractor fan was booked for 10 July 2023.
    5. It said a complaint raised about the repairs supervisor’s conduct was closed the same day after the resident spoke to his manager.
    6. Although it was not responsible for internal decoration, it offered £300 compensation as a “goodwill gesture” on 25 April 2023. Plus an additional £100 in recognition of service failures made up of:
      1. £20 for 2 callbacks not responded to within 2 working days.
      2. £50 for inconvenience caused having to chase repair information and appointments.
      3. £30 for complaint handling failures as the complaint should have been logged on 19 May 2023.
    7. It said it had learnt from feedback and now had a dedicated complaints team.
  4. The resident escalated the complaint on 3 August 2023 as the repairs had not been resolved. The landlord upheld the complaint and sent its stage 2 response on 13 September 2023, in which it said:
    1. A bathroom inspection was booked for 26 May 2023 however it was unable to gain access. It was the resident’s responsibility to re-arrange the appointment. It said if there is no contact within 7 days the work order is closed.
    2. An inspection was raised for the dining room ceiling after the water damage. It was also to re-decorate after the repairs. However, there was no access on the 10 July 2023. It said it was sorry to hear the resident was in hospital around this time.
    3. It apologised it did not contact the resident to re-arrange appointments which caused her to chase updates.
    4. Regarding the fridge-freezer, the resident should claim on her home contents insurance. If she could not do so, she could contact its insurance team and explain why she believed the landlord was responsible.
    5. In relation to the extractor fans, it said constantly running fans are installed as standard to combat condensation issues. It attached a cost guide/comparison supplied by the manufacturer and said there is little to no difference in the cost of running the fans.
    6. It awarded a further £325 compensation (in addition to the £400 already offered), made up of:
      1. £50 for distress caused after her bathroom was left untidy after repairs.
      2. £50 for distress caused after the call with the repairs supervisor.
      3. An additional £50 to cover the full amount of compensation due for decorating the kitchen, bathroom and lounge.
      4. £75 for complaint handling failures.
      5. £100 for inconvenience, time and effort to get issues resolved.

Events after the end of the landlord’s internal complaints process

  1. The resident chased the repairs in October and November 2023. The landlord attended on 29 November 2023 to complete repairs to the damaged bathroom flooring and wood. The resident chased again in December 2023 as she believed a plastering appointment was scheduled for 6 December 2023. However the work had not been booked in. The landlord attended on 18 December 2024 and 3 January 2024 to complete plastering work. However, the resident called on 4 January 2024 and said the kitchen plastering was incomplete.
  2. The landlord attended around 11 January 2024 to assess the plastering. It said:
    1. The plaster needed a light sanding in preparation for decoration.
    2. It would not do this as this was cosmetic work rather than repairs.

The resident said she would contact this service.

  1. A note dated 24 April 2024 said plastering in the dining room had been completed. However, it was not sanded and no mist coat was applied. The plaster was sanded and mist coat applied on 15 May 2024.
  2. The landlord paid the resident £200 in further compensation on 21 June 2024 for its failure to register a formal repairs stage 1 complaint on 19 May 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Throughout the course of her contact with both the landlord and the Ombudsman, the resident has raised concerns about a number of additional issues within the property including with the:
    1. Bathroom sink.
    2. Bath scratched by repairs operatives. 
    3. Toilet not being secure and creaking.
    4. Damp and mould.
    5. Shower screen.
    6. Shower curtain.
    7. Guttering.
    8. Downstairs toilet.
    9. Bathroom window condition.
    10. Kitchen ceiling light installed, but not left in a condition to decorate.
    11. Holes where new extractor fans were installed that needed to be filled.

Whilst these points have been responded to by the landlord at various stages of its communication with the resident, there is no evidence of them being raised consistently through the full complaints process. As a result, the landlord has not had a proper opportunity to investigate and resolve them through the operation of that process. The resident may wish to raise a separate complaint if she has not already done so.

Handling of repairs following a leak.

  1. The residents tenancy agreement says:
    1. The landlord is responsible to keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the premises including:
      1. internal walls, floors and ceilings, but not including internal painting and decoration.
      2. major plasterwork (except minor cracks and blemishes).
      3. any installation provided for sanitation including basins, sinks, baths, toilets, flushing systems and waste pipes.
    2. The resident is responsible to:
      1. Keep the interior of the property in good and clean condition and to decorate all internal parts as often as necessary to keep them in good decorative order.
      2. Carry out minor plaster repairs to walls and ceilings.
      3. Allow the landlord’s staff or contractors access to carry out repairs at reasonable times subject to reasonable notice (normally at least 24 hours unless an emergency.)
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy says:
    1. “an emergency repair should be completed within 24 hours. The landlord may not always be able to complete all works, but it will make [the property] safe.” The policy says examples of an emergency repair are a severe leak or burst pipe that cannot be contained, or a leak that is affecting the electrics.
    2. “routine repairs should be completed at a time that’s convenient for the resident within 28 days of being reported.”
    3. It is responsible for water pipes, water heaters including radiators, sinks, basins, toilet bowls and bath including sealant and leaks.
    4. It will make the surfaces decorative ready (which will include a mist coat) and provide decoration vouchers if damage is because of a water leak that it is responsible for.
  3. It is good practice for a landlord to maintain accurate, contemporaneous records on reports it receives, and its actions in response. This enables it to effectively manage any issues raised by its residents as well as fulfilling its obligations as a landlord. Neither the landlord nor the Ombudsman can properly investigate and respond to complaints without accurate and comprehensive records and this could result in unfairness to the resident. Whilst the record keeping in this case was overall of a good standard, the resident said the landlord attended “4 or 5 times” between January and April 2023 before she raised her first complaint. However, there is no record of these appointments or what happened. It was also not clear what happened in all the appointments between December 2023 and May 2024. It has therefore not been possible to fully understand what action was taken at every stage of the handling of the repairs, which has impacted our ability to carry out a thorough investigation.
  4. The landlord’s initial response to the resident’s leak report was good. Its records showed it raised an emergency repair, attended the same day, and made the property safe as per its policy. The resident said although the leak was stopped, she called back 2 days later to report another leak. The landlord again attended the same day, in line with its policy, and completed a repair. These were positive and timely actions by the landlord.
  5. The landlord raised follow-on repairs to the bathroom (flooring and wood around toilet) and damaged ceiling below the bathroom on 4 January 2023. Its records showed a call with the resident on 8 February 2023 to reschedule the ceiling plastering repair. The stage 1 complaint noted a further appointment for 23 February 2023. However, it was not clear what happened with the repairs. In a phone call with this service, the resident said the landlord visited her property between 4 January 2023 and when she complained on 5 April 2023. However there are no records of these visits. On 5 April 2023 the resident said:
    1. She wanted the bathroom repairs addressed.
    2. There were water marks and stains to the dining room ceiling and she wanted the dining room ceiling repaired/plastered.
    3. She had been told to stick wallpaper that had peeled off [due to the leak] back with glue.
    4. She wanted compensation to cover the cost of re-decorating the room.

The landlord closed the complaint at first point of contact. It noted it:

  1. Told the resident it would try to move the repairs forward, or maybe use a contractor to complete all repairs in one go.” However it “set clear expectations.This was after the resident said she worked full-time so wanted all repairs completed in 1 or 2 days.
  2. Arranged for an inspection of all outstanding repairs for 11 April 2023 (which was rescheduled at the residents request for 18 April 2023).
  3. Scheduled repairs for the bathroom (flooring, wood around the toilet) for 26 May 2023, and a ceiling repair (due to water damage and plaster coming off) on 12 June 2023.
  4. Offered £300 to cover the cost of re-decorating.

The landlord took action to put things right for the resident and address the repairs. However, whilst that was reasonable, it did not explain why the repairs had not already been completed. 

  1. The landlord phoned the resident on 16 May 2023 and said it had raised further repairs following the inspection. However, it had not been possible to book them for either arranged appointment. Given the bathroom and decorative repairs should have been completed by early February in line with its policy, it was reasonable for it to try and accommodate the resident’s request for all repairs to be completed the same day. However, this raised the resident’s expectations, and led to her frustration and disappointment when this was not possible.
  2. The resident raised a second complaint on 19 May 2023. The landlord again closed the complaint as resolved at first point of contact. This was after it called the resident on 25 May 2023 and re-scheduled some of the repair appointments (damaged ceiling and extractor fans) to 10 July 2023. This was reasonable as the resident said she was unavailable through June and the first week of July.
  3. However, there was no evidence to show that any of the re-scheduled repairs were for the damaged ceiling. It was also not clear whether the resident was told if the bathroom repair (flooring and wood) scheduled for the following day had also been re-scheduled. The landlord should have clarified with the resident exactly which repairs it had moved to 10 July 2023. The poor communication and lack of clarity meant the landlord attended the next day, but had no access. This contributed to delays.
  4. The resident chased clarity on the outstanding repairs on 5 and 11 June 2023. She raised a third complaint after a call with the landlord on 16 June 2023. The landlord tried to contact the resident on 23 and 30 June 2023 but was unsuccessful. It then sent its stage 1 complaint response which said its repairs supervisor would attend on 3 July 2023. However, the resident told the landlord she had a hospital appointment. The records showed the landlord asked the resident when she would be available on the 3, 6 and 7 July 2023. This was proactive and showed it was trying to resolve the repairs. The resident responded 3 days later and said she had been in hospital and “should be able to speak in a week or 2.” However, this meant the repairs scheduled for 10 July 2023 (ceiling) were not completed. The landlord said it would contact her on 26 July 2023, which was reasonable given the resident’s request.
  5. The resident chased the repairs on 25 July 2023. Some bathroom repairs were completed the next day, although it is not clear exactly which were completed. There was also no evidence to show the failed repair appointment of 10 July 2023 was rescheduled. This was a missed opportunity for the landlord to resolve the outstanding repairs and represents a failing. The resident chased the outstanding repairs again on 3, 10 and 16 August 2023. She then requested to reschedule a repair appointment (unclear what for) booked for 29 August 2023 to after 1 September 2023 due to an appointment. After the stage 2 response, it was a further 3 weeks before the resident chased for a list of outstanding repairs. She then subsequently cancelled another appointment arranged for 10 October 2023.
  6. The landlord’s policy says routine repairs should be completed within 28 days. Its records indicate a degree of confusion as to exactly what repairs were required, and which had been completed. The resident requested a list of outstanding repairs on multiple occasions, but was not provided with one. There was also confusion over the plastering/decorative repairs as the resident believed a repair was booked for 6 December 2023. However, the evidence suggests the repair was not booked in, which contributed to delays and was a failing. The confusion and lack of ownership over a prolonged period of time exacerbated the resident’s frustration and disappointment. The landlord failed to manage the residents expectations effectively during this time.
  7. The bathroom repairs initially raised on 4 January 2023 following the leak were completed on 29 November 2023, almost 11 months later, and 2 months after the stage 2 complaint response. The plastering was completed over a number of visits around a year after the leak. It was then a further 4 months before the decorative work was completed to the resident’s satisfaction due to conflicting opinions on who was responsible to decorate. Whilst it is acknowledged not all the delays were the fault of the landlord, the resident was waiting for repairs following the leak for an unreasonable length of time. The time taken to complete the repairs went significantly beyond the timescale outlined in the landlord’s repairs policy. This caused the resident distress, inconvenience, and affected her enjoyment of the property.
  8. The landlord’s complaint responses acknowledged some failings and made some attempt to put things right. It acknowledged the inconvenience in its stage 2 response and awarded £100 compensation, which was reasonable at the time. It said it had attended to complete the original bathroom repairs and decorative repairs on 26 May 2023 and 10 July 2023 respectively, but the resident was not in. The landlord said it would review its no access carding process to ensure it is clear it is the residents responsibility to reschedule failed appointments. Whilst this is a positive step, no evidence was provided to conclusively say if the landlord did attend on these dates and leave a card.
  9. The Ombudsman encourages landlords to review their complaint handling and responses. In this case, the landlord offered £200 for its poor complaint handling in June 2024. Whilst this was positive, this was 9 months after the stage 2 response. It also did not offer any further compensation for the further delays and inconvenience caused completing the repairs after the stage 2 response. The Ombudsman therefore finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs following a leak, and further compensation of £300 is awarded.

Fridge-freezer

  1. The landlord’s compensation policy says:
    1. Claims for damage to personal belongings are ordinarily covered by a home contents insurance policy.”
    2. Claims for damage to personal belongings as a result of alleged negligence by us need to be considered by our insurers.”
  2. The landlord’s website also says:
    1. Its insurance policy does not cover damage to resident’s belongings.
    2. Residents may wish to take home contents insurance to protect their possessions from damage.
  3. The resident purchased a new fridge-freezer which was delivered on 11 October 2022. She said her fridge-freezer was damaged by the leak in January 2023. However, it was not clear when she first told the landlord of this. She emailed the landlord on 11 June 2023, 5 months after the leak, and said her fridge had not worked properly since being soaked by the leak.” The landlord spoke to the resident 5 days later and said it would “look into the insurance side of things.” However, it was not clear exactly what action was taken, or whether the resident was given an update.
  4. The landlord then advised claims for damage to personal belongings should be made on home contents insurance in the first instance in the stage 1 complaint response sent 30 June 2023. This was reasonable and in line with its policy.
  5. The resident sent a follow-up email on 3 August 2023 to chase the issue. It was not clear who she spoke to, however she contacted the landlord’s insurance department regarding a claim and supplied the fridge-freezer invoice on 13 September 2023. The same day the landlord issued its stage 2 response and repeated she should claim on her own home contents insurance, in line with policy. This was a reasonable approach to take.
  6. In a call with the landlord on 8 November 2023 the resident said she had been “promised the fridge-freezer would be replaced, but [the landlord] changed [its] mind.” It was again explained that damaged items need to be claimed for via contents insurance. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident feels strongly the landlord should compensate her for damage allegedly caused by the leak to her fridge-freezer. It is also acknowledged the resident did not wish to claim on her policy as she was worried about any potential premium increase. However, the leak was resolved promptly. The landlord acted reasonably and in line with policy by advising her to claim via her home contents insurance policy. The evidence suggested it also considered whether it would cover the cost, which was reasonable, but decided it would not do so. There was therefore no maladministration in its response to the resident’s concerns raised in relation to her fridge-freezer.

Staff conduct

  1. The landlord’s website sets out its overarching service standards. It says its staff will always be polite and professional, and will be clear about the services it provides.
  2. In the phone call of 5 April 2023 the resident said she had spoken to a member of staff that morning who was “very rude”. The landlord noted it listened to the call and although information provided to the resident had been correct, the landlord described the call as “inflammatory” and “could have been handled better.” Its notes said the advisor would attend further training, which was a reasonable approach for it to take.
  3. Having been promised repair updates which were not received, the resident chased on 16 May 2023. However she said the repairs supervisor was “rude, spoke over her, and had a terrible attitude”. She requested to speak to his manager. The manager called the resident 3 days later, apologised and moved repair appointments. In its stage 2 response it offered a further £50 for any distress caused to the resident after the call. Taking into account the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, there was reasonable redress.
  4. The Ombudsman notes 2 further complaints raised by the resident in relation to staff conduct in November 2023 after the stage 2 complaint response was issued. A recommendation has therefore been made.

Extractor fans

  1. The repair records show the kitchen and bathroom extractor fans were replaced on 10 July 2023 after an inspection a week earlier. After the fans were installed (and stage 1 response), the resident said she was worried about the running costs. The landlord used its stage 2 response to address her concerns and attached a cost guide/comparison. Whilst this was not provided to this service, this was a reasonable response to address the resident’s concerns. There was therefore no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns raised in relation to the extractor fans.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says:
    1. It aims to resolve resident dissatisfaction promptly wherever possible.
    2. Should the dissatisfaction not be resolved by the end of the next working day to the resident’s satisfaction, the complaint will be progressed for formal investigation at stage 1 of its complaints process.
    3. A stage 1 response will be issued within 10 working days.
    4. Should a resident remain dissatisfied, it aims to issue a stage 2 response within 20 working days of the case being escalated.
  2. The evidence showed the resident initially complained on 5 April 2023. Whilst it is acknowledged the landlord tried to put things right, it had not resolved the repairs to the resident’s satisfaction by the end of the next day. It would have been reasonable for the complaint to progress to stage 1 for a formal investigation. The landlord originally awarded £30 for complaint handling failures in its stage 1 response and said a complaint [in relation to the repairs] should have been logged on 19 May 2023. The failure to escalate either of the resident’s complaints in relation to the repairs to stage 1 delayed the resident getting her issues resolved. It also delayed her bringing the complaint to this service, which was unreasonable.
  3. The stage 2 response increased the compensation offer for complaint handling to £75. However, the response was sent 29 working days after the escalation request which was outside the timescale set out in its policy. Ordinarily a 9 day delay would not be significant, however due to the 2 complaints closed at first point of contact, the stage 2 was sent 111 working days after the resident first raised a complaint in relation to the repairs. This meant that the matter became unnecessarily protracted, and caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident. Further, whilst the stage 2 response raised further repairs to inspect the bathroom flooring, it failed to mention the plastering/decorative repairs, which was a failing. It therefore missed an opportunity to use its complaint process to put things right for the resident at the earliest opportunity.
  4. The landlord said it had learnt from the complaint in its stage 2 response, which was positive. However, overall the landlord’s complaint handling was poor. Whilst it offered £200 compensation on 21 June 2024, it was not clear if this replaced the £75 previously offered, or was in addition to it. As a suitable offer was not made until 9 months after the end of the complaints process, a finding of service failure is made and an additional sum of £100 is awarded to recognise this period of delay.
  5. An order has been made that the landlord pay £100 compensation to the resident, to reflect the inconvenience, time and trouble its complaint handling failings caused. If the £75 offered in the stage 2 has not been paid, the landlord should pay this too. This amount is less than would ordinarily be ordered under our guidance on remedies to acknowledge the fact the landlord has already paid £200 for its poor complaints handling, as mentioned above.

Determinations

  1. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs following a leak.
  2. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns raised in relation to her fridge-freezer.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns raised in relation to staff conduct.
  4. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns raised in relation to the extractor fans.
  5. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears a further £300 for its failings in relation to handling of repairs following a leak.
    3. Pay directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears a further £175 for its complaint handling failures. If the £75 offered in its stage 2 complaint response has already been paid, the landlord should only pay a further £100. 

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should consider whether it would be appropriate to remind all staff of its overarching service standards. Particularly front-line staff that may deal with residents frustrated by repair delays.
  2. The landlord should consider whether to contact the resident and discuss the process for claiming through its own insurance policy for her damaged fridge-freezer.
  3. The landlord should consider whether it should send details of the exact work to be completed on a repair appointment when it texts residents the repair number and appointment.