Wandle Housing Association Limited (202126023)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202126023

Wandle Housing Association Limited

7 February 2024

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 landlord’s handling of the following:
1. the residents report of draughty windows in need of repair.
2. Outstanding works from beginning of tenancy including gaps to back door, removal of rubbish from side of property, replacement of damaged fence panels.
3. Repairs to the bathroom shower, basin tap and door.
4. The subsequent complaint.

Jurisdiction

What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Scheme. When a complaint is brought to this service, the Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
After carefully considering all the evidence, the complaint relating to repairs to the bathroom shower, door, and basin tap are not matters that the Ombudsman can consider as part of this investigation as these issues were raised after the initial complaint and had not completed the landlord’s complaints procedure at the time this complaint was referred to the Ombudsman. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which sets out that the Ombudsman will not consider complaints that are made prior to having exhausted the complaints procedure unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord has not acted within a reasonable timescale.

Background and summary of events

The resident is the assured tenant of a 2-bedroom house owned by the landlord where she lives with her partner and two children. The tenancy commenced in October 2018. The resident has explained that the house is cold as there are gaps around the windows and back door which let in cold air and mean it is both expensive and difficult to keep the house heated. She had raised the issue with the landlord at the start of the tenancy and was led to believe action would be taken, however this did not happen.
In addition, she raised concerns regarding the landlord’s communication with her and referred to the inconvenience and distress caused by missed appointments and incomplete works. She had chased works to resolve the problems with the windows in 2019, along with works to the back door, the removal of rubbish and wood from the side of the house and the replacement of damaged fencing panels. She explained that these works had been outstanding since the beginning of the tenancy. The landlord visited and the resident was told that the works would take place. A window operative had attended but had never returned and the situation remains the same. She provided job numbers relating to the works that had not been completed.
The resident complained to the landlord about the situation on 12 October 2021. The same month she requested a further visit stating that the house was unbearably cold.
The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint on 29 October 2021. It explained that she had submitted a formal complaint at stage one of the complaints process about the same issue in October 2019. The landlord’s policy was that it would not generally accept a complaint where the issue arose occurred over six months ago. It stated that it would not look at the matter again as the issue was over three years old. It advised the resident to raise any outstanding repairs via the usual repair channels.
The resident emailed again on 22 November 2021 stating that she was starting legal proceedings as the landlord was putting the family’s health at risk and was in breach of its repairing obligations. She also advised that she was seeking compensation for the anxiety and stress caused to her by the situation and for the number of gas top ups she had had to purchase to keep the property warm.
The landlord’s response on 24 November 2021 again referred her to report the repairs to the repairs team and repeated its position in relation to the complaint.
The resident emailed the landlord again on 7 December 2021. The email was sent to customer services and was headed “repairs.” It advised the landlord of the following repairs that were needed at the resident’s home:
1. All windows in need of replacement due to allowing cold air into property.
2. Big gap between back door and frame.
3. Window restrictors broken.
4. Kitchen window handle fallen off.
5. Shower not working.
6. Bathroom sink hot tap not fixed down.
7. Removal of rubbish and wood left at the side of the house.
8. Replacement of broken fence panels.
9. Bathroom door coming unhinged.
The landlord apologised for the delay in its repairs service issuing a reply on 6 January 2022. It explained that there were delays due to backlog after the Christmas period, but the team were working hard to clear all outstanding complaints.
The following day, on 7 January 2022 the resident contacted the landlord again as she had returned home in time for a repair appointment scheduled for 11am-2pm to find a card had already been left by the operative. She had confirmed with customer services that the landlord had her email and telephone number, so she raised a further complaint that she had not been contacted and the appointment had been missed.
The complaints team contacted the resident on the same day. It apologised for the error and confirmed the operative had been contacted and would reattend at the arranged time. The manager of the repairs team passed on her sincere apologies for the distress caused to the resident. The email confirmed that, in light of these events, and the amount of time the resident had been waiting for a response to the complaint, the matter had been escalated to stage two and passed to a senior manager.
There were discussions between the senior manager and the resident, and an email dated 4 February 2022 set out the landlord’s findings at stage two of the complaints process. No formal complaint letters appear to have been sent at either stage of the complaint procedure although the stage two email contained the relevant details as to how the matter had been considered and escalation to the Ombudsman.
The stage two response stated that the windows were scheduled for replacement on 4 March 2022. It set out that the resident had raised the problems with the windows three years ago and that no substantive action was taken. The landlord recognised that the level of service provided was not acceptable had therefore considered her request for compensation for a three-year period and concluded that £1000 was a fair amount for the delay and inconvenience caused to the resident. The email stated that in accordance with policy, where rent arrears exist, the sum would be credited to the rent account to reduce the resident’s outstanding debt. This should mean that she was able to renegotiate the repayment plan in place as the debt would be reduced.
The resident was unhappy with this response as it only dealt with one element of her complaint and did not mention the other repairs that remained outstanding. She was not happy with the tone of her conversations with the senior manager and did not feel listened to. She was also dissatisfied with the level of compensation which she stated would not cover a fraction of her gas bills and did not recognise the time and trouble she had to go to reporting unattended appointments and incomplete repairs, or the distress and inconvenience caused to herself and her family.

Assessment and findings

Windows

Section 11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sets out the landlord’s responsibilities for repairs to the property. This includes repairs to the structure and exterior of the home which would include external doors and windows. This is mirrored in the tenancy agreement. The landlord was therefore responsible for any repair once aware that there was a problem.
The legislation gives no specific timescale but expects repairs to be undertaken within a reasonable period of time. The tenancy agreement sets out that the landlord will set a target timescale for different sort of repairs depending upon how urgent they are. The landlord’s policy details these target timescales and the landlord’s service standards which are as follows:
1. Emergency repairs – within 24 hours.
2. Appointed repairs (non-emergency, by appointment) – within 28 days.
3. Major repairs (over £1,000) – within 90 days.
Further, the landlord has an obligation to ensure that the homes it provides meet the Decent Homes Standard. For a home to be considered ‘decent’ it must:
1. Meet the current statutory minimum standard for housing.
2. Be in a reasonable state of repair.
3. Have reasonably modern facilities and services, and;
4. Provide a reasonable degree of thermal comfort.
This final criterion requires dwellings to have both effective insulation and efficient heating. The Government’s Met Office website states that “Ideally you should heat your home to a temperature of at least 18 °C.” It is not known to what temperature the property could be heated, nor for how long this could be retained as there is no evidence of any heat loss assessment being undertaken by the landlord.
There is no evidence as to how the landlord sought to comply with its obligations or service standards, and no records of any repairs, inspections or surveys have been provided. The landlord was made aware of the problems with the ill-fitting windows, broken handle, and restrictors, and knew that the resident was reporting difficulties in keeping the property heated due to the gaps allowing cold air to enter the property. No temporary repairs were undertaken pending replacement of the windows, nor any heat loss assessment to assist the resident keep the home warm. Whilst the window replacement has now taken place, the length of time the resident had to wait far exceeded the landlord’s target timescales by a number of years. In addition, in order to get the work undertaken at all took a determined effort by the resident who was forced to raise the issue on a number of occasions and submit formal complaints before the landlord acted.
The landlord has recognised that the service it provided was not acceptable and has offered compensation of £1,000 for the delay and inconvenience caused by the lack of action over a three-year period. This equates to £333.33 per year. During the three-year period, the rent paid by the resident was in the region of £18,676 (based upon the rent level in 2018). The offer made by the landlord was low and did not fully recognise the distress, time and trouble caused to the resident. In addition, there was no offer of any reimbursement for increased heating costs. Although the landlord has gone some way to put things right its offer does not fully redress the service failure. A further £500 in compensation has been ordered in this respect below, in addition to the £1,000 offered during the complaints process. This figure has considered additional heating costs incurred by the resident during the period of delay.

Outstanding repairs

The resident’s complaint dated 12 October 2021 referred to the following items of repair, which she explained had been agreed following an inspection in July 2019:
1. Back door replacement.
2. Removal of rubbish from side of house.
3. Replacement of damaged fence panels.
4. Replacement of a garden tap.
The resident complained that the works were still outstanding, that there had been a number of missed appointments, disconnected telephone calls, and cancelled or incomplete work. She provided the job numbers for the incomplete works. She confirmed that she had arranged for the garden tap to be replaced privately and asked that the remaining works be completed.
The landlord has provided no evidence relating to any of these repairs. Neither did it respond to these issues as part of the complaint. It is not possible for this Service to ascertain whether these repairs have been completed, and if so, how long this took. In addition, there is no evidence of any investigation into the resident’s concerns regarding incomplete/cancelled work orders, missed appointments and disconnected calls. This is of concern.
Given the lack of evidence of any response to these concerns the Ombudsman has concluded that there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of this complaint. A compensation order has been made below to reflect the detriment experienced by the resident. In addition, a further order has been included for the landlord to inspect the property and then provide a schedule of works to the resident.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s handling of this complaint raised a number of concerns. Initially the resident was advised that as the issues she was complaining about occurred over three years ago the complaints policy prohibited her from raising the issue. Given that the repairs remained outstanding this cannot be a fair interpretation of the complaints policy. In addition, the resident was told to report the repairs again, rather than the complaints team referring the matter to the repairs team. This required additional time and trouble from the resident and sent her back to the team that she was wanting to complain about.
The landlord failed to issue a decision at stage one of the complaints process. It is clear that the staff member undertook some exemplary work in resolving the presenting issue of non-attendance by the operative. However, the decision to escalate the complaint without a response was not fair. This meant the resident lost the right to an internal review of the landlord’s decision and the landlord lost the opportunity to correct any errors/omissions. Had the landlord provided an initial response the missed complaint about repairs (see above) may well have been identified and addressed.
The landlord failed to identify these failings in its complaint handling and no redress has been offered. There was therefore maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was:
1. Maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the window repairs.
2. Maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the outstanding repairs
3. Maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the complaint.

Reasons

The landlord has accepted that its service delivery in relation to the windows was unacceptable, however it has failed to offer suitable redress to the resident for the distress caused and the time and trouble necessary to get the work started. In addition, there has been no exploration or reimbursement of the additional heating costs incurred by the resident due to the heat loss.
There is no evidence of any action taken in relation to the other repairs. Nor was there any investigation into the concerns raised about missed appointments, incomplete/cancelled works, and disconnected calls. This may be due to poor record keeping, or poor complaint management. In either event, this was not appropriate, and the resident has had to continue to pursue these repairs.
The landlord’s complaint handling made it difficult for the resident to pursue her complaint, failed to provide her the option of an internal review, missed the complaint regarding the outstanding repairs (other than the windows) and missed the opportunity to review its handling of the matter.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord pays additional compensation of £1,300 to the resident, comprising
1. £500 for the distress, time and trouble caused to the resident by the delays in undertaking repairs to the windows.
2. £400 for its failure to respond to the complaint regarding the outstanding repairs.
3. £400 for complaint handling failures.
That the landlord undertakes an inspection at the resident’s home to ascertain whether all repairs have been completed. The resident should then be provided with a repairs schedule detailing when work will be undertaken in relation to any outstanding repairs. The repairs schedule to be shared with this service and be provided to the resident by the date below.
Payment of this compensation should be additional to the compensation paid during the complaints process. The additional compensation to be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any debt/arrears. The landlord should confirm and evidence its compliance with the orders in this case to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

The landlord undertakes a review of its handling of the repairs and complaint to identifies areas where improvements can be made. The landlord should then advise the resident how it will implement the improvements identified and the relevant timescales.