From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

bpha Limited (202415213)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202415213

bpha Limited

29 August 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 bathroom and kitchen repairs.

Background

  1. The resident was an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord from 18 September 2017 until around October 2024. The tenancy ended as the resident had a managed move to another property managed by the landlord.
  2. The property was a 2-bedroom property on the first floor.
  3. The landlord said during the complaint process it did not have any vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. In assessing the resident’s managed move the landlord became aware the resident had anxiety and depression.
  4. The resident reported a defect to the bathroom floor on 5 January 2024. On 11 January 2024, the resident provided a picture of the bathroom floor. In the same communication the resident reported a defect to the kitchen units. In response, the landlord arranged for a surveyor inspection of the kitchen units and for its contractor to repair the bathroom floor.
  5. The resident made a complaint on 26 January 2024. The resident said:
    1. For years she had been trying to get a resolution for the multiple repairs required to the property.
    2. The kitchen was falling apart, the floorboards were damaged and there was a hole in the bathroom floor.
    3. An appointment had been arranged for repairs to be completed that day. However, no one attended the appointment resulting in a loss of her earnings.
    4. When she tried to contact the landlord, she had been placed on hold for 40 minutes. She had been unable to speak with anyone as the contact centre had closed.
    5. If the landlord did not respond within a week, she would consider legal action.
  6. On 7 February 2024, the landlord provided its Stage 1 complaint response. The landlord:
    1. Apologised for the time taken to complete the repairs and any health and safety risks to the resident and her daughter.
    2. Explained the inspection was cancelled on 25 January 2024 due to staff absence. It acknowledged the resident said she had not received the voicemail it had left.
    3. Said the inspection had been rearranged for 9 February 2024 and that it had tried to arrange an earlier appointment but had been unable to do so.
    4. Said the flooring was made safe on 29 January 2024 and it had agreed to undertake follow on works.
    5. Advised once the order was raised, an appointment would be made with the resident. It said it would make a “promise call’ if the resident had not been contacted within a week regarding this.
    6. Apologised for the time taken to make safe and complete the works. The inhouse maintenance manager had been informed to prevent such a situation reoccurring.
  7. The landlord reopened the complaint on 15 July 2024 as the works remained outstanding. The landlord noted the works had been rescheduled twice .
  8. The landlord provided its Stage 2 complaint response on 14 August 2024. The landlord:
    1. Said a repair had been raised to carry out the bathroom works in February 2024. It said that its contractor had experienced difficulty agreeing a convenient appointment.
    2. Advised its contractor would contact the resident by 19 August 2024 to make a convenient appointment. It understood a voice mail had been left for the resident that morning.
    3. Said it attended on 24 July 2024 to overhaul the kitchen units. The resident was not available, and a no access card was left. Its scheduling team would contact the resident to agree a convenient appointment.
    4. Acknowledged the resident had experienced long call wait times. It gave alternative means of contact such as its customer portal and WhatsApp.
    5. Explained it could not offer reimbursement for loss of earnings. However, it could consider a good will gesture in recognition of her experience. For this it awarded £50 for the missed appointments by the repair team and delay in the repairs being completed.
  9. After the complaint process ended, on 27 August 2024, the landlord installed  a new bath.
  10. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint to us. The resident expressed the kitchen repairs were not completed in a reasonable time. She also said that the landlord had not provided appropriate support to her as a vulnerable person and requested the compensation award be increased.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. The Ombudsman is unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. Nonetheless, the investigation will consider any inconvenience or distress caused to the resident.
  2. The resident has told us she had reported the bathroom and kitchen repairs around 3 years ago that remain unresolved. There is no evidence the resident complained to the landlord at that time or that her concerns were escalated to us. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the events happened. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable, and personnel involved may have left an organisation. This makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Taking this into account and the availability and reliability of evidence, this assessment has focussed on the period from January 2024 onwards which was considered during the landlords complaint process.

Tenancy terms and landlord policies

  1. Under Section 11 of the landlord and tenant Act 1985, there is an implied term in the tenancy agreement for the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property.
  2. The tenancy agreement requires the resident to provide access for the landlord to inspect the condition of the property and to carry out repairs.
  3. The landlord’s repair policy available online says it will attend emergency appointments and make safe within 24 hours. Routine appointments will be completed within 28 days. Residents can see reported repairs in its customer portal including the repairs history for the past 6 months.

Landlord’s handling of the repairs to the bathroom and kitchen

  1. Landlords have an obligation to maintain the home to a reasonable standard and respond to reports of repairs in a reasonable timeframe. The landlord’s repair policy says it will respond to routine repairs within 28 days.
  2. The report has considered each repair in turn below which was the subject of the resident’s complaint.

Repairs to the bathroom

  1. The resident reported on 5 January 2024 there was a hole in the bathroom floor. The resident provided additional information regarding the bathroom floor on 11 January 2024. The landlord took 15 days (to 26 January 2024) to inspect the flooring. While the landlord attended within its routine repair standard, the time taken was not reasonable considering the potential of a health and safety hazard.
  2. The landlord’s sub-contractor on 31 January 2024 attended to make the flooring safe. The sub-contractor sent a quote to the landlord for the follow-on works required to complete the repair to the bathroom floor. The following day 1 February 2024, the landlord checked to make sure the quote had been received. This was reasonable as the landlord was responsible for monitoring the progress of the works and had committed to do so in its Stage 1 complaint response.
  3. The landlord’s repair policy says it will agree a mutually convenient appointment with its residents. The landlord has evidenced its contractor tried to contact the resident on 13 February 2024 and 16 February 2024 but its attempts to agree an appointment was not successful. It is not evident when the landlord attended to inspect the property. However, by 20 February 2024 a schedule of works was drawn up to:
    1. replace the bath wash hand basin and toilet
    2. renew area floor to the bathroom
    3. Supply and lay new flooring to the bathroom
    4. boxed in pipes behind the wash hand basin.
  4. The landlord in its complaint responses says it’s subcontractor had difficulty contacting the resident to arrange a mutually convenient appointment to carry out the identified bathroom repairs. The landlord is responsible for the actions of its contractor. The landlord had difficulty arranging the surveyor inspection which is detailed later in this report. The landlord has not detailed the appointments made after the surveyor inspection in May 2024 to August 2024 specifically related to the bathroom repairs. The lack of records regarding the bathroom appointments makes it difficult to establish whether the landlord acted appropriately when trying to progress the bathroom repairs to completion.
  5. Given the landlord assessed the bathroom repairs were outstanding, it showed its commitment to getting the repairs resolved. The Stage 2 complaint response informed the resident the appointment would be rescheduled. The landlord also evidenced it had followed this up with its contractor who had left a voicemail for the resident that day regarding this.
  6. After the complaint process ended, the bathroom works identified in the schedule of works was completed on 27 August 2024. The landlord said it agreed to carry out the work when the resident had a period of leave. The landlord’s repair policy says that it will carry out such repairs within 28 days. The repairs to the bathroom significantly exceeded this which likely caused inconvenience and distress to the resident and her family. However, a delay in repairs is not always considered a failure. The landlord has evidenced that some of the delay was caused by the difficulty in arranging a mutually convenient appointment with the resident. However, the gap in its records between May 2024 to August 2024 makes it difficult to say with any certainty it acted appropriately to progress the bathroom repairs.

Kitchen repairs

  1. The landlord’s repair policy says it is responsible for kitchen cupboards, wall units, sinks and taps. The resident reported on 11 January 2024 a defect to the kitchen units. In the same report, the resident also said the kitchen floor was uneven following a previous repair carried out by the landlord.
  2. It was reasonable the landlord arranged to inspect the property on 25 January 2024. The inspection was to take place within 15 days. However, the landlord had staff shortages, and the inspection could not take place. The landlord took reasonable steps to notify the resident of the cancellation by leaving a voice message to notify her. The landlord said in its Stage 1 complaint response it tried to organise an earlier inspection date but was unable to do so. This was reasonable as the cancellation caused inconvenience and distress to the resident.
  3. The appointment for the inspection was rearranged for 11 working days later on 9 February 2024. When the surveyor attended, the resident was not available. The landlord acted in line with its repair policy by leaving a calling card for the resident. This was to notify the resident it had attended and to inform her to arrange another appointment.
  4. It was reasonable the landlord rescheduled the appointment for 26 March 2024. 3 reminder texts were sent to the resident before the agreed appointment date. On 26 March 2024 the resident was not available, and a calling card was left. Under the tenancy agreement the resident is required to provide access to the landlord to inspect and carry out repairs to the property. The resident did not give reasons for her unavailability on the day.
  5. The landlord repairs policy available on line says if residents are not available it will offer another appointment. It was reasonable for the landlord to act in line with its repair policy and agree with the resident a convenient appointment for 15 May 2024. The inspection identified defects to the kitchen unit under the sink and to a side panel of a kitchen unit which needed securing. The inspection also assessed the kitchen floor. The kitchen floor was assessed to be slightly raised but did not constitute a trip hazard. The landlord is entitled to rely on the professional advice it receives therefore it was reasonable for it to conclude there was no defect to the kitchen floor that required action.
  6. Following the inspection a works order was raised on 23 May 2024. An appointment was arranged for the works to the kitchen unit and side panel to be carried out on 15 July 2024. The target timescale was 36 working days which exceeded its repairing timescales of 20 days for a routine repair. This was not reasonable.
  7. The resident was contacted on 15 July 2024 by the landlord advising the appointment had to be cancelled. The reason for the cancellation was the operative was unable to attend because he was held up on an emergency repair. The resident expressed to the landlord her frustration and the inconvenience to her regarding the cancelled appointment. The cancellation was beyond the landlord’s control as it was unable to foresee it would need extended time to resolve the emergency callout. A further appointment was arranged for 24 July 2024, 9 days later.
  8. The landlord attended on 26 July 2024, and the resident was not available. The landlord’s records do not explain why its subcontractor attended on 26 July 2024 when the appointment had been arranged for 24 July 2024. It is likely a miscommunication occurred regarding the rescheduling of the appointment. The landlord took the opportunity to rectify this in its Stage 2 complaint response by agreeing for its scheduling team to contact the resident to arrange a further appointment with the resident. This showed a customer focused response rather than giving the responsibility to the resident to raise another appointment.
  9. Future commitments made in landlord’s complaint responses should be completed within a reasonable timescale. It is not reasonable that there is no evidence the landlord attended to complete the identified repairs required to the residents kitchen before her tenancy ended around October 2024. The landlord told us during the void process repairs to the kitchen units were undertaken, this is likely to include the repairs it had agreed to complete. The delay in getting the kitchen works progressed likely caused inconvenience to the resident.
  10. It was reasonable that the landlord in its complaint responses explained to the resident it could not reimburse her for any loss of earnings. This is consistent with its compensation policy and with our Remedies Guidance. Our Remedies Guidance explained residents are expected to provide access for inspections and for repairs to carried out. This can cause some inconvenience to residents when landlords are resolving repairs. Therefore, landlords in its complaint review should consider any inconvenience or time and trouble experienced by residents.
  11. In its Stage 2 complaint response, the landlord apologised to the resident for any inconvenience she experienced and offered redress of £50. Our remedies guidance sets out when the impact to the resident was of a short duration compensation between £50 to £100 is appropriate. The landlord’s complaints award is at the lower end of the category for finding service failure. The redress offered did not take into account the overall impact to the resident, such as the appointments it had to cancel due to staff shortages and the bathroom and kitchen repairs did not take place within its published time targets. The landlord’s compensation award did does not properly reflect the detriment experienced by the resident. For those reasons the compensation is not considered reasonable or proportionate and a finding of service failure has been made.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing ombudsman scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the bathroom and kitchen repairs.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report landlord should:
    1. Write  to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident an overall compensation award of £200 for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident .This includes the £50 compensation awarded during the complaints process.
    3. If the landlord has already paid the £50 awarded through the complaints process to the resident, it can deduct this from the order above and pay the remaining balance to the resident. Our compensation order cannot be used to offset any outstanding arrears on the resident’s rent account.
  2. The landlord should reply to us with evidence of compliance with the orders within the timescale outlined.