Spitalfields Housing Association Limited (202217735)

Decision
Case ID	202217735
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Spitalfields Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	31 October 2025

Background

The resident lives in a first floor flat in a purpose-built block.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about how the landlord handled:
1. Concerns about an anonymous letter.
2. Concerns about the cleanliness and decoration of the communal areas.
3. Reports of entry phone systems not working.
4. A dispute about rent arrears.
5. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

The concerns about an anonymous letter are outside jurisdiction.
There was service failure in how the landlord handled concerns about the cleanliness and decoration of the communal areas.
There was maladministration in how the landlord handled reports of entry phone systems not working.
There was no maladministration in how the landlord handled a dispute about rent arrears.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Concerns about an anonymous letter

The issues raised did not have any adverse effect on the resident’s occupation of the property.

The cleanliness and decoration of communal areas

The landlord delayed inspecting the cleanliness of the communal areas. It also delayed adding decorating the communal areas to its cyclical work programme.

Reports of entry phone systems not working

The landlord did not repair the entry phone systems within a reasonable time. It also provided no updates or communication to the resident about the repair issues.

A dispute about rent arrears

The landlord acted appropriately in trying to clarify what the resident disputed on her rent account.

The complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint handling was not compliant with the Code or its own policy, due to excessive delays.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 28 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £400 made up as follows: £100 for the impact on the resident of its failings in how it handled concerns about the cleanliness and decoration of the communal areas. £150 for the impact on the resident of its failings in how it handled reports of entry phone systems not working. £150 for the impact on the resident of its complaint handling failures. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 28 November 2025
3	Inspection order The landlord must arrange an inspection of the entry phone systems on the door and gate. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the entry phone systems on the door and gate of the property and produces a written report with photographs. The survey report must set out: The most likely cause of the problems with the entry phone systems. Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible. A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective repair to the issue (if the landlord is responsible). The likely timescales to commence and complete the work	No later than 28 November 2025

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
7 September 2022	The resident raised her complaint. She enclosed an anonymous letter she received in March 2021 that made various accusations about the landlord’s board and members of staff. She said the cleaning of communal areas was inadequate and the landlord had not painted them in the 11 years since she moved in. She said the entry phone system on the gate and external door had been out of order since December 2021. She also disputed having arrears on her rent account.
13 September 2022	The landlord acknowledged the complaint and said it would issue a response within 10 working days.
26 September 2022	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It provided evidence of a letter it had previously sent to all residents in response to the anonymous letter. It clarified its position on the matters and said legal action was ongoing against the person responsible for a smear campaign. It said it had reported the cleaning issues to its maintenance team on her behalf. It also said it could arrange for a housing officer to attend and discuss and view any issues she had with cleaning. It said it had also raised repair work for the entry phone systems. It asked the resident for further information on why she disputed the arrears on her account so it could investigate further.
11 October 2022	The resident asked to escalate her complaint. She said the landlord had not fully answered all her questions and she wanted full responses within 20 working days.
23 November 2022	The landlord wrote to the resident and said she had not explained what she was dissatisfied with in its complaint response, or what she wanted as a resolution. It said it would therefore not escalate the complaint to stage 2 of its complaint process.
28 June to 21 July 2023	We contacted the landlord twice and asked it to escalate the complaint to stage 2 and provide its response to the resident.
23 August 2023	The landlord issued its final complaint response. It said it had already provided its response to the anonymous letter. It said it inspected the communal arears on 8 December 2022 and found the cleaning to be satisfactory. It completed a deep clean on 7 March 2023. It then inspected on 6 April 2023 and again found no issues. It again offered to complete a joint inspection of the communal arears with the resident. It confirmed it would include the decorating of the communal areas in its cyclical works programme. It said the resident had not clarified why she thought she had no arrears. It told her she was not in receipt of full housing benefit, which meant there was a shortfall in payments.
Events since the final complaint response	The landlord completed decorating the communal areas in April 2024 as part of its cyclical works programme.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate as the landlord had not decorated the communal areas. She also continued to dispute having any rent arrears.

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	Concerns about an anonymous letter.
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

The resident raised various concerns with the landlord about an anonymous letter she had received in March 2021. They ranged from queries about nepotism on the board, the salaries of its staff and location of its offices.
In order for us to investigate a complaint, the resident must have suffered some level of adverse effect in their occupation of, or application for, property. How the landlord decides to appoint board members, where it locates its office, or what salaries it awards to staff is outside of our jurisdiction. This means we have not investigated this aspect of the complaint.

Complaint	The cleanliness and decoration of communal areas.
Finding	Service failure

Our role is not to determine if there was fault with the cleaning of communal areas, or if they needed decorating. Our role is to assess how the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns.
Under the tenancy agreement, the landlord has an obligation to keep the interior of the communal areas in a good and clean condition. It should also decorate all internal parts of the communal areas as frequently as is necessary to keep them in good decorative order.
Following the resident reporting her concerns on 7 September 2022, the landlord said it raised the matter with its maintenance team. It also offered to arrange a joint visit with the resident to view her concerns and discuss matters directly in its stage 1 response. This was a reasonable response.
According to the landlord’s records, it inspected the communal areas on 8 December 2022. It recorded that it found the cleaning to be of a satisfactory standard. We consider the delay of 3 months to inspect the cleaning to be unreasonable.
Following the resident disputing the cleanliness again, the landlord told he on 10 January 2023 that it would arrange another inspection to be completed with her present. This was a reasonable response. However, we have seen no evidence of it arranging an inspection with her, which is a failure.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 6 March 2023 and enclosed a petition signed by multiple residents of the building complaining about the standard of cleaning. The landlord completed a deep clean of the communal areas the next day. This was a reasonable and appropriate response.
The landlord completed a further inspection of the communal areas on 6 April 2023. It again recorded that it found the cleaning to be of a satisfactory standard. It also took photographs of the cleaning in progress. This was an appropriate action to take.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 19 June 2023 and confirmed it would include decorating the communal areas in its cyclical works programme. There is no evidence to suggest the decoration of the communal areas had significantly deteriorated from the resident’s initial concern of September 2022 and June 2023. We therefore consider the delay of 9 months to add the decorating to its cyclical works programme to be a service failure.
In summary, the landlord took 3 months to inspect the cleanliness of the communal areas. It failed to arrange a joint inspection with the resident despite promises to do so. It also took 9 months to add the decorating to its cyclical works programme. The landlord did not acknowledge these delays in its complaint response. For these reasons, we find service failure in the landlord’s handling of concerns about the cleanliness and decoration of the communal areas.
We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 in recognition of these failures. This level of redress recognises the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by chasing up her concerns.

Complaint	Reports of entry phone systems not working.
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s repairs policy does not include any specific timescales for it to complete repairs. However, it is required to complete repairs in a reasonable time under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. What is considered a reasonable time will depend on the scale of the work and the effect the disrepair is having.
Following the resident reporting her concerns on 7 September 2022, the landlord said it had raised the repair in its stage 1 complaint response of 26 September 2022. The evidence of repair works provided to us shows a repair note dated 25 November 2022 to supply and install gate works. A repair note dated 11 January 2023 for the main entrance gate. And a repair note dated 16 January 2023 stating the front door magnet plate was missing.
There was therefore evidence of ongoing repair work in January 2023, which is 4 months after the resident reported the issues. We consider the time taken to resolve the issues to be unreasonable and therefore a failure.
The landlord’s repairs records are unclear. They do not detail the exact nature of the repair that was raised or the timescale it should be completed in. The records also do not clarify if or when it completed repairs, and there is no evidence of any updates or correspondence sent to the resident about the repairs. This reflects poor record keeping and poor communication and is a further failure.
The landlord did not mention the gate or door repairs in its final complaint response of 23 August 2023, which was a failing. However, there are further repair notes relating to the gate in October 2023, February, April and June 2024. The resident has since told us the gate is still not working. It is unclear from the landlord’s records if the issues with the gate are new problems that need resolving, or if it is the same ongoing issue.
In summary, there is no evidence the landlord repaired the entry phone systems on the door and gate within a reasonable time. It also did not provide any updates or correspondence to the resident about any repairs. We have therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of the entry phone systems not working. We have ordered it to pay the resident £150 in compensation. This amount reflects the cumulative impact of its poor record keeping and lack of communication, and the time and trouble caused to the resident.

Complaint	A dispute about rent arrears.
Finding	No maladministration

According to the landlord’s rent arrears policy, it will minimise rent arrears through fair and firm action. It says it will conduct continuous monitoring to take action via personal contact, ensuring debts do not escalate.
In the resident’s complaint, she said she had been sent numerous letters over the years about rent arrears. In correspondence with us, she has provided several rent arrears letters dated between 2014 and 2020.
We would expect residents to raise matters with their landlord within a reasonable period of matters arising (usually within 12 months). The only evidence of arrears correspondence at that time were historical. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to ask in its stage 1 complaint response for further information on why she disputed the current arrears on her account so it could investigate further.
The resident provided no further context or information to the landlord about the rent arrears she disputed or why. In its final complaint response, the landlord said it had not received any clarification from her about what was disputed. However, it explained she was not in receipt of full housing benefit so every month there was a shortfall in payments. It also provided a number to discuss matters further with an income officer.
In summary, it was reasonable for the landlord to ask for further clarification of the resident’s dispute, due to the rent arrears correspondence being historical. In its complaint response it provided an explanation for how some arrears had accrued and provided signposting to its income officer to discuss any concerns. We have found there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint.
Finding	Maladministration

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out clear expectations for how landlords should manage complaints. At stage 1 of its complaints process, landlords must acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It should issue a response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. At stage 2 of its complaints process, landlords must respond within 20 working days, with a possible extension of up to 20 additional working days, subject to agreement with the resident. The landlord operated a 3 stage complaints policy. It states it would issue a stage 1 complaint response in 10 working days. A stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days. And a stage 3 response within 20 working days.
In this case the resident submitted a complaint on 7 September 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint 4 working days later. It issued its stage 1 response a further 9 working days later, which was compliant with the Code and its own policy.
When the resident asked to escalate her complaint on 11 October 2022, the landlord refused. This unreasonably delayed the completion of the complaints process and denied the resident the option to bring her complaint to us.
Following our intervention, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 23 August 2023. This was over 10 months after the resident asked to escalate the complaint. This was not compliant with the Code or the landlord’s own policy.
In summary, the landlord’s complaint handling was not compliant with the Code or its own complaints policy, due to excessive delays escalating the complaint to stage 2. We have therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling and have ordered it to pay the resident £150 in compensation. This amount reflects the cumulative impact of its poor complaint handling, and the time and trouble caused to the resident.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord has not provided evidence of any cleaning inspection reports. Some of its repair records are also unclear and do not detail the full nature or outcome of the works completed. At times, this has affected our ability to assess its actions.

Communication

The landlord has provided no evidence of sending the resident any updates or correspondence about repair jobs it raised. The landlord should explore ways to maintain consistent contact with residents while repairs are ongoing.