Sanctuary Housing Association (202447739)

Decision
Case ID	202447739
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Sanctuary Housing Association
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	24 October 2025

Background

1. The property is a semi-detached home which the resident has lived in since 2019.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of a leak into the property.
3. The landlord’s handling of additional repairs to the property.
4. We have also considered the landlord’s complaints handling.

Our decision (determination)

5. We have found that:
   1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak into the property.
   2. The redress offered by the landlord around additional repairs to the property was reasonable.
   3. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaints handling.
6. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of a leak into the property

7. While the landlord has provided the resident with an appropriate offer of redress for its failures, it has not completed the repairs within a reasonable period of time after making the commitment to do so. As the leak has been ongoing since March 2024, we consider service failure has occurred as it has taken too long to rectify the complained of issues. The landlord has acknowledged this itself but not offered any further redress to recognise the impact on the resident.

The landlord’s handling of additional repairs to the property:

8.  We found the compensation offered to the resident was reasonable in the circumstances.

The landlord’s complaints handling:

9. The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s escalation request.

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	Communication order Within 4 weeks the landlord is to contact the resident and update them on the progress of the roof repairs. This should include what work is outstanding, and its planned timescales for completing the repairs.	No later than 21 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1250 made up as follows: The £930 offered to the resident prior to our investigation £270 for its handling of the leaks into the property. £50 for its complaints handling. 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 21 November 2025

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The finding of a service failure is made on the understanding that the landlord should pay the resident the compensation of £250 it previously offered the resident, if it has not already done so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
5 December 2024	The resident complained to the landlord. In their complaint the resident said a leak into the loft had caused damp and mould to form on the upstairs ceiling. They said water ingress was also affecting their satellite TV and internet services.   The resident said they had previously reported to the landlord that the hinges in their kitchen cupboards were causing the cupboards to pop open, and there were fallen fence panels in the garden. They said the landlord had not addressed these issues.
17 December 2024	The landlord sent its stage one response. This said: The resident had not followed up on a voicemail left in July 2024 about scheduling an appointment for the garden fence. It apologised for the delay in addressing the leak and that it had not completed the works in line with its policy. It had arranged appointments to repair the kitchen cupboards on 10 July 2024 and 24 July 2024, but the appointments did not go ahead. Due to record keeping issues it did not know if it, or the resident, had cancelled the appointments. It had arranged for its repairs team to contact the resident and book in appointments for the outstanding repairs. It offered the resident £250 in compensation for its delays in addressing the repairs.
17 December 2024	The resident escalated their complaint as they felt the landlord had not made adequate arrangements to complete the repairs.
January to February 2025	The resident chased the landlord for an update on its stage 2 response three times.
13 February 2025	The landlord sent its stage 2 response. This said: When the resident first reported the leak in March 2022 its contractors attended the property as an emergency response. The resident then reported the leak had gotten worse on 21 March 2024. Following this there were delays in it responding to the repair due to an error made by its repairs centre team. It inspected the roof on 25 July 2024 and raised repairs. A contractor attended the property on 28 August 2024 to assess the issue and prepare a quote for the works. It approved the quote and instructed a contractor on 31 January 2025. It apologised for the delays and committed to monitoring the progress of the repairs. The issues with it completing the repairs to the kitchen cupboards were due to a mistake made in the repairs centre when the repairs were incorrectly marked as completed. It had committed to arranging repairs to the fence and kitchen cupboards in its stage one response, but it had not made the necessary arrangements for the repairs. The landlord apologised and said it had raised the matter with the relevant team and their manager. It apologised for the delays the resident experienced at stage 2 and offered £50 in compensation. It awarded the resident an additional £200 in compensation for the delays the resident had experienced post stage one. This brought the total compensation offered to the resident as £50 for complaints handling, and £450 for the repairs made up of the £250 offered at stage one and the £200 offered at stage 2.
25 February 2025	The resident brought their complaint to us as they didn’t think the compensation offered by the landlord fully reflected its delays, and because they wanted the repairs to be completed.
4 March 2025	The resident contacted the landlord and said they did not believe the compensation offered was reasonable as it had not considered the loss of use of their satellite TV and internet services.
7 April 2025	The landlord revised the compensation it had previously offered and updated the compensation to: The £450 offered during its complaints procedure. An additional payment of £280 for the impact the leak had on the resident’s satellite TV and the use of their bedroom. An additional payment of £100 for the delays in the garden fence and kitchen cupboards being repaired. £50 for the resident having to chase its repairs team for an update.   This brought the full compensation offered to the resident to £930.

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.

The compensation offered

The landlord did not fully break down how the compensation should be divided across the various repairs, so we have used the following assumptions as the basis for considering the landlord’s offer. We have done so in a manner we believe is fair and accounts for the leak being the primary complained of issue.

£580 for the landlord’s handling of the leak, comprised of:

• £300 from the compensation offered during the landlord’s complaints procedure.
• The £280 offered post stage 2.

£250 for the landlord’s handling of additional repairs to the property, comprised of:

• £100 from the compensation offered during the landlord’s complaints procedure.
• The £100 offered post stage 2.
• The £50 offered post stage 2.

The landlord’s complaints handling:

• The £50 offered at stage 2.

 

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of a leak into the property.
Finding	Service failure

10. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will attend emergency repairs within 24 hours. For responsive repairs it will attend within 28 days, and for more complex repairs it will book in appointments within 45 days. It will aim to complete all major repairs within 90 days.
11. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a legal duty on a landlord to make full, effective and lasting repairs once it becomes aware a repair is required.
12. On 21 March 2024 the resident reported a leak into their property from the roof. The landlord attended the property within 24 hours, this was appropriate. On 6 May 2024 the resident told the landlord the leak was getting worse and there was now a significant damp and mould patch on the upstairs ceiling. The landlord arranged an inspection to occur on 24 July 2024, and contractors attended the property on 28 August 2024 to assess the required works.
13. On 8 October 2024 the contractors provided the landlord with a proposed quote for the works. From the evidence available it appears the landlord did not progress approving this quote or arranging the works. This was unreasonable.
14. In its stage one response dated 17 December 2024 the landlord apologised for the time it had taken to arrange the repairs. It said its repairs team would arrange appointments for the roof repairs, and for the damp and mould. On 31 January 2025 the landlord booked in the roofing contractors and assigned a target date of 1 April 2025 to complete the works by. This was appropriate, considering the delays the resident had already experienced.
15. In its stage 2 response dated 13 February 2025 the landlord apologised that the roof repairs had not started. It told the resident that contractors had been booked in to complete the works, and it would continue to monitor the progress of the repairs. It was appropriate that the landlord committed to monitor the repair considering the delays the resident had experienced.
16. On 4 March 2025 the resident told the landlord that no one had been in touch with them about the planned works. They also said that the landlord had not addressed how the leak had impacted their satellite TV and internet connection. The landlord acknowledged this as a failure, and it apologised to the resident. It also offered the resident additional compensation. This was appropriate and good customer service.
17. The landlord told us on 8 October 2025 that it was currently conducting the roof repairs, and it expected to complete the works soon. The landlord has acknowledged to us that it had taken longer than it would have liked for the roof repairs to be conducted. It is positive that the landlord is actively completing the repairs now. However, it should have completed the works at an earlier stage.
18. The resident has told us that they feel the landlord’s communication about the repairs has been poor, and they are unsure when the works will be completed. They said this was causing them distress as they cannot complete on a planned mutual exchange until the repairs have concluded.
19. We consider that the £580 compensation offered was reasonable in the circumstances and at the point that the offer was made as this amount is in line with our remedies guidance. As the redress offered was reasonable, if the repairs had been completed within a reasonable period after the landlord’s final response, we would have made a finding of reasonable redress.
20. The works are still ongoing a year and a half after the leak was reported, and around six months after the landlord’s revised offer of compensation. As such we consider a maladministration has occurred as the landlord has not provided any reasonable explanation for the delays the resident experienced after the landlord’s complaints procedure finished. To address this, we have ordered the landlord to contact the resident and outline what repairs are outstanding and its timescales for completing the works. This will assist the resident in understanding the nature of the outstanding repairs so they can make plans around their proposed mutual exchange.
21. We have also ordered the landlord to provide the resident with additional compensation to reflect the time taken to complete the repair since its offer of compensation on 7 April 2025. To calculate a fair and reasonable amount, we divided the £580 previously offered by the number of months the repair had been ongoing at the time of that offer. This equates to £45 per calendar month. We then multiplied this figure by 6 to reflect the six months that have passed since the offer, resulting in a total of £270 in additional compensation.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of additional repairs to the property.
Finding	Reasonable redress

22. On 4 August 2022 the resident told the landlord that fence panels in their garden had broken. The landlord attended the property on 10 August 2022 and fixed four of the fence panels. It raised a new appointment to complete the job on 15 December 2022. On 13 December 2022 the landlord called the resident to ask if it could bring the planned appointment forward, the resident missed this call. From the available evidence it appears the repair was not progressed after this point.
23. On 27 March 2024 the resident reported issues with the hinges in the kitchen cupboards being too big, they said this caused the cupboards to pop open. The landlord booked an appointment to attend this repair on 21 May 2024. It rescheduled the appointment to 10 July 2024, but the repair did not go ahead on this date.
24. In its stage one response dated 17 December 2024 the landlord apologised to the resident and said it had asked its repairs department to book in both repairs. The landlord said it could not be sure why the kitchen cupboard repair did not go ahead as its records for this repair were poor. While this was a failing, it was positive that the landlord identified its poor record keeping so it could work on making improvements.
25. In its stage 2 response dated 13 February 2025 the landlord apologised that its repairs team had not booked in the repairs as per its stage one response. It was unreasonable that the repairs had not been booked in considering the landlord’s commitment, and because it had been 59 days since the stage one response. However, it was positive that the landlord acknowledged its own failings and that it offered the resident additional compensation for the delay.
26. The landlord completed the repairs to the kitchen hinges on 2 April 2025. It also agreed to fill in holes from spotlights that had been removed from the units, this was good customer service.
27. The landlord replaced the fence panel on 21 May 2025. While this was over a year and a half after the resident reported that the fence was damaged, the resident’s tenancy agreement says that the landlord is not responsible for the garden fences. Therefore, it was positive that the landlord completed this repair when it was not required to do so.
28. The landlord has told us that at the time of relevance to the resident’s complaint it was in the process of building an online bespoke system for booking in and managing repairs. The landlord said this system is now in place, and it allows for better oversight of repairs. This is a positive development considering the delays and record keeping issues highlighted in this report.
29. The resident would have experienced inconvenience and annoyance from the repairs being outstanding for a considerable period. However, the fence panels and kitchen cupboards not being in full working order would not have had a significant impact on the resident’s enjoyment of their home. As such, we consider the compensation of £250 adequately remedied the landlord’s failings.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

30. The landlord’s complaints policy outlines the timescales in which it will respond to a complaint. The landlord commits to acknowledging complaints within 5 working days, and to provide its stage one response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. If the resident wishes for their complaint to be escalated to stage 2, the landlord will acknowledge this request within 5 working days and provide its response within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
31. At stage one the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint and provided its stage one response in line with the timescales in its policy.
32. The resident escalated their complaint on 17 December 2024. The landlord has told us it does not have any record of this escalation request being acknowledged. This is unreasonable.
33. The resident chased the landlord for a stage 2 response on 29 January 2025, 4 February 2025 and 11 February 2025. This indicated the resident was concerned at the lack of communication from the landlord. The resident’s distress could have been limited if the landlord had clearly communicated its next steps when acknowledging the resident’s escalation request. It also would have been an improvement for the landlord to inform the resident that it could not meet its stage 2 timescales and explain the reason behind this delay.
34. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 13 February 2025, this was 40 working days after the resident escalated their complaint. The landlord apologised for this delay and offered the resident £50 in compensation. It was appropriate that the landlord acknowledged its shortcomings and offered the resident redress. We consider this to be sufficient compensation for the delays at stage 2.
35. We consider a service failure occurred as the landlord either did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint, or it has not retained a record of the acknowledgement. To remedy this, we have ordered the landlord to pay an additional £50 in compensation.