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

Wandle Housing Association Limited (202301518)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202301518

Wandle Housing Association Limited

24 July 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs for a loose banister and a damaged ceiling.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord for a 3 bedroom house. She is elderly, and her daughter acts as her representative for this complaint.
  2. On 19 December 2022, the resident’s representative raised a formal complaint on her behalf. She said that despite a recent assessment by an occupational therapist that recommended repairs, they remained outstanding. The representative confirmed that the outstanding repairs were for a loose banister, and the resident’s ceiling, which she said was “falling down.”
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 10 March 2023. It said that a contractor had attended the property on 2 March 2023 and fixed the banister. For the ceiling, it explained that a contractor had attended on 20 January 2023, but follow up works were needed to complete a full repair. It said a surveyor would be in touch with the resident within 7 days to arrange an appointment for the works.
  4. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. On 13 September 2023, she explained through her representative that she had received no updates on her complaint, and that repairs on the ceiling remained outstanding.
  5. The landlord provided its final response on 18 December 2023. It said that some repairs had commenced, but not been completed due to “miscommunication,” and that the banister had been fixed, but the ceiling work remained outstanding. It also explained that its repairs team would contact the resident within a week to arrange next steps for repairs. Finally, it offered the resident £150 in compensation for the delayed repairs, and £100 for its delayed complaint response.
  6. The resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, and is seeking increased compensation to resolve her complaint. She has confirmed to this service that the outstanding repairs were completed in March 2024.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs for a loose banister and a damaged ceiling

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy says that emergency repairs, which include making safe dangerous structures such as ceilings and staircases, will be completed within 24 hours, or attended to within 2 hours if the landlord judges the problem to be severe. For non-emergency repairs, which include repairs to plasterwork, it aims to complete them within 28 days. For major works, which are non-emergency routine repairs, the landlord aims to complete them within 90 days.
  2. The policy also states that for elderly tenants, the landlord will consider increasing the priority of repairs.
  3. As the resident reported via her representative that her banister was unsteady on 19 December 2022, the landlord was required to attend the property and make a non-emergency repair within 28 days. The resident’s representative had reported to the landlord that the resident had mobility and health issues, and was concerned about health and safety at the property. Given this, and the landlord’s policy on elderly residents, it also would have been reasonable for it to attend sooner.
  4. The landlord completed a repair on the banister on 2 March 2023, 50 working days after the resident reported it. This was an excessive delay given the potential health and safety issue, and will likely have caused the resident considerable frustration and inconvenience. It also meant that the landlord did not adhere to its repairs policy in respect of non-emergency repairs.
  5. On the same day that she reported problems with the banister, the resident’s representative also reported that the ceiling was “falling down.” According to the landlord’s repair records, it attended the property on 20 January 2023, and determined that the ceiling had been damaged when new windows had previously been fitted. It classified the repairs needed as major works, which meant that, in line with its own timescales for repairs, it had 90 days to complete them.
  6. According to its records, the landlord missed a repairs appointment for 5 April 2023, and only completed a repair on the ceiling on 25 March 2024, almost a year after it was reported. This caused the resident prolonged distress and inconvenience, and meant that she was living in a property in need of major works for a disproportionate amount of time, which was unreasonable, given the resident’s representative’s concerns that the ceiling might collapse.
  7. In summary, the landlord failed to complete non-emergency repairs, and major works, within the timescales set out in its own repairs policy. As such, the Ombudsman considers this did amount to maladministration and therefore the landlord should pay the resident compensation to recognise how these failings impacted her.
  8. The resident has explained via her representative the significant frustration, upset and distress she faced as a result of the delayed repairs. It is noted that in its final complaint response in December 2023, the landlord offered the resident £150 for the delays. However, this was after intervention by this Service, and the compensation offered at the time also fails to reflect the fact that repairs remained outstanding until almost a year after they were first reported.
  9. Having carefully considered the Ombudsman’s policy and guidance on remedies, a fair level of compensation would be an additional £400. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for failings which the landlord has identified and made an offer of compensation on, that was not proportionate to the failings identified in this investigation.
  10. The landlord has also been ordered to review its handling of repairs in this case, to identify areas for learning and improvement.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, a landlord must ensure it acknowledges a complaint within 5 working days. It must then respond to the complaint within 10 working days of the date of acknowledgment at stage 1, and provide a final response within 20 working days of the date of acknowledging the escalation request.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy is compliant with the provisions of the Code.
  3. The resident’s representative raised her complaint on 19 December 2022, so the landlord had until 23 December 2022 to acknowledge it. It then had until 5 January to provide its stage 1 response. There is no evidence the landlord acknowledged the complaint, and it provided its complaint response 56 working days after the complaint was raised.
  4. However, at the time the complaint was raised, the resident’s daughter was not listed as her representative. It was only when she completed a consent form on 23 January 2023 that the landlord’s records were updated to reflect the change. Despite this change, a stage 1 complaint response was not provided until 10 March 2023, after the resident’s representative contacted it on 28 February 2023 to chase a response.
  5. It was appropriate for the landlord to ask for a consent form, and it does appear that some of the delays caused in providing its stage 1 response were as a result of not having one. But, it would have been appropriate after consent was given for the landlord to check with the resident’s representative that she wanted a complaint raised. Instead, it continued to contact the resident directly, who was understandably confused. This could have been avoided had the landlord paid attention to who it was contacting.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint on 13 September 2023, so the landlord was required to acknowledge it by 20 September 2023. It then had until 18 October 2023 to provide its stage 2 response. The landlord acknowledged the complaint escalation on the same day, and provided its response on 18 December 2023, 68 working days after the escalation request was made. This was after the representative chased it for a response a number of times, and after this Service ordered it to provide a response.
  7. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged the delay, and awarded the resident £100 compensation. This was reasonable, and in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for failures which have impacted a resident. However, it does not appear to have recognised its failure to provide a stage 1 response on time, and its errors in contacting the resident directly.
  8. In summary, the Ombudsman finds that there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. It failed to respond to the resident’s complaint in line with the Code, and failed to communicate with the correct party on occasion. This appears to have been caused in part by poor communication and poor record keeping. An order has therefore been made below for the landlord to review its process for keeping up to date contact information for residents, to avoid similar incidents reoccurring. It has also been ordered to review its complaint handling in this case, to identify areas for learning and improvement.
  9. Additionally, the landlord has been ordered to pay the resident £100, to recognise its complaint handling failures at stage 1 of its complaints process, and the subsequent distress and confusion caused to the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was responsible for maladministration in its handling of repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was responsible for service failure in its complaint handling.

 

Orders

Orders

  1. The landlord must, within 28 days of the date of this determination:
    1. Pay the resident £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of repairs.
    2. Review its handling of repairs in this case, to identify areas for learning and improvement.
    3. Pay the resident £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
    4. Review its process for keeping up to date contact information for residents, to avoid the mistakes identified in this investigation reoccurring.
    5. Review its complaint handling in this case, to identify areas for learning and improvement.
  2. The landlord must provide this Service with proof the above orders have been completed.