We are updating our systems this weekend. You will be unable to submit an online complaint form from Friday 3 April until Monday 6 April.

Normal services will resume on Tuesday 7 April.

Thank you for your patience.

Wandle Housing Association Limited (202430750)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202430750

Wandle Housing Association Limited

18 September 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the bathroom.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, who is a housing association. The resident lives with her non-dependent children. The property is a one bedroom second floor flat.
  2. The landlord installed a new bathroom in the property in February 2023 and its records show the resident made the following service requests:
    1. The bathroom light was not working and leaks to the basin and toilet reported on 21 March 2023, with the light fixed on 3 April 2023.The landlord identified no issues with the basin and toilet on 14 April 2023.
    2. A leaking toilet and the taps and shower had been fitted incorrectly reported on 8 September 2023. The landlord attended on 15 September 2023 and changed the pipes around. It also identified there was an air block in the stack as the bath and basin had now both run clear.
    3. A leaking toilet and blocked basin reported on 29 December 2023. The landlord attended on 15 January 2024 and completed work to repair the toilet and basin and also unblocked the basin again as it was badly blocked.
  3. The resident sent a formal complaint to the landlord on 22 February 2024 as she had experienced issues with blockages and leaks since the bathroom installation. She was seeking compensation for the distress caused and for the landlord to reimburse her for the damaged furniture and flooring she had to replace. This was acknowledged by the landlord the same day.
  4. The landlord provided a stage one response on 1 March 2024 and advised it would be conducting a joint visit on 4 March 2024. It committed to complete all works identified, followed by a final sign off. It advised it would consider any compensation due in line with its complaint policy and ensure the resident was kept informed.
  5. The landlord says it conducted a joint visit on 4 March 2024 and could not find any leaks from the toilet; however, it did notice condensation from the cistern. It could not identify any defect to the toilet pan or soil pipe, however the basin was blocked at the time of visit. It also identified there was mouldy sealant to the side of the bath and further sealant was lifting from the floor. 
  6. The resident attempted to escalate her complaint on 22 April 2024 by telephone however this was registered as a new complaint by the landlord. She again complained about the blockages and leaks and that there had been failed repair appointments by the landlord. This was acknowledged by the landlord the same day.
  7. The landlord provided its stage one response on 1 May 2024 advising it would carry out outstanding repairs and provide an appointment date to do so.
  8. The landlord attended on 17 May 2024 however the resident was not aware of the appointment so rebooked. The landlord reattended on 13 June 2024 and overhauled and raised the cistern and fitted a new waste pipe, non-return valve and an anti-syphon tap. The landlord found the filler pipe was screwed into the floor, so repaired the floor and pipe. It also renewed the bath panel and sealed with silicone.
  9. The resident escalated her complaint on 30 July 2024. She stated she did not want to wait until 21 August 2024 for an appointment and was unhappy only one contractor arrived that day when she believed it should have been 2. We have seen no notes in the landlord’s file to show what this related to. The landlord acknowledged the escalation on 5 August 2024.
  10. The landlord attended on 21 August 2024 and carried out work to resolve blockages to the bath and toilet in response to the resident’s formal complaint.
  11. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 23 August 2024 where it acknowledged it could have done better, as it attended on more than one occasion. It further acknowledged it had at times failed to attend within its repair policy timeframes. It apologised for the discomfort this caused and offered £200 compensation for the inconvenience and impact on the resident.
  12. The resident brought her complaint to us as she said her landlord had stopped responding to her communications and she was unhappy with the amount of compensation offered for the issues which took over a year to resolve.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In the resident’s complaint to us she complained that she was forced to employ a private plumber to resolve the blockages. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to our involvement. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be raised directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required.

The landlord’s handling of reports of repair issues to the bathroom

  1. The landlord’s responsive repair policy states that it will complete non-emergency repairs within 28 days, an emergency repair within 24 hours and an urgent repair within 7 days. The policy also confirms it is responsible for repairs to the bathroom.
  2. The landlord was responsive when the resident reported that her bathroom light was not working on 21 March 2023 as it attended within 13 days (3 April 2023) to make the repair, which was within its repair policy timeframes set out above. In the service request the resident had also reported leaks to the basin and toilet. The landlord attended within 24 days (14 April 2023) and did not identify any issues. Although issues were later identified from the new bathroom installation it was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the expert advice received at the time, particularly given this was the first report it had received since the bathroom was installed.
  3. The resident reported a leaking toilet and that the hot and cold taps and shower had been fitted incorrectly on 8 September 2023. The landlord appropriately identified this as an urgent repair and attended within 7 days (15 September 2023) which was in line with its repair policy. Although it identified there may have been an air block as the bath and basin had now both “ran clear” we have seen no evidence that this was explored further. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have raised another repair if it was not able to resolve the issue on this visit.
  4. The resident reported a leaking toilet and blocked basin on 14 December 2023. The landlord’s repair log shows it appropriately categorised the repair as urgent and an appointment was made within 7 days in line with its repairs policy. The landlord recorded no access on the first visit. The repair visit was rebooked on 29 December 2023 with the landlord attending on 15 January 2024. Although it is understandable that there may be some service delays over the festive period it took 17 days to address an urgent repair after it was rebooked. This is 10 days beyond what is allowed in the repairs policy which is not a reasonable response.
  5. The landlord identified issues with the initial installation (February 2023) during the visit on 15 January 2024. It sealed the cistern to the wall as it identified it had not been fixed to it. It identified the toilet was constantly moving and leaking as the pan connector was too short, which it replaced. It again unblocked the basin with a plunger. Its repair notes state if it blocks again, it will require a specialist to conduct more extensive unblocking by “Sani snaking”. The landlord also noted that the pipework was “not very good and that it may need to cut open the pipework” to rectify the issue. Although positive it had now identified the cause of some of the issues it was unreasonable it had taken a year to do so. This was especially so due to the number of issues identified and repeat visits for the same repairs.
  6. The landlord attended on 30 January 2024 where again it had to unblock the basin. It identified the waste had been poorly installed and believed this was the reason the basin continued to block. It identified issues (not further described) with the toilet leaking, the bath not being level and that the bathroom floor had movement. There is no evidence the landlord carried out any work to rectify the problem or book any further works at this time which was unreasonable.
  7. The landlord reports it conducted a joint visit on 4 March 2024 in relation to the resident’s complaint and could not find any leaks from the toilet; however, it did notice condensation from the cistern. It could not identify any defect to the toilet pan or soil pipe, however the basin was blocked at the time of visit. This suggests that the landlord failed to take its own advice provided at a previous visit and have a specialist clear the pipes which was unreasonable and caused the resident further unnecessary inconvenience. The landlord also failed to keep a contemporaneous record of the inspection and therefore we cannot be sure it carried out a thorough investigation. Due to this it is unclear what action it took to unblock the basin, which was not appropriate. Considering the number of reports it had received by this time and findings of previous inspections; the landlord should have considered a more robust approach to investigating the cause of the recurring issues.
  8. The resident reported a toilet blockage, plumbing issues and leaks from the toilet on 22 April 2024 with the landlord appropriately categorising the toilet blockage as an emergency. The landlord however, attended on 24 April 2024 which is one day beyond what is allowed under its repair policy. This was an unreasonable response, especially with the previous missed opportunities to resolve the issues. The further call out should also have alerted the landlord to the issue being recurring and requiring further investigation.
  9. The landlord attended on 17 May 2024 in response to the resident’s complaint however the resident was not aware of the appointment so it was rebooked. The landlord however was able to assess the work that was required to be completed to rectify the leaking toilet and bath not filtering water away properly. The landlord reattended on 13 June 2024 and took images which show significant black staining under floor coverings at the sink. It overhauled and raised the cistern and fitted a new waste pipe, non-return valve and an anti-syphon tap. The landlord found the filler pipe was screwed into the floor, so repaired the floor and pipe. It also renewed the bath panel and sealed with silicone.
  10. It was unreasonable that the works identified related to the initial bathroom installation and that it had taken repeated visits and the resident having to go through the landlord’s complaint process to have the work identified and completed. The landlord’s failure to manage the bathroom replacement and repairs properly caused unnecessary inconvenience and distress to the resident over a 16-month period which was unreasonable.
  11. The resident reports she still experienced blockages after the landlord had completed its work. We have seen the landlord’s repair log where the resident made service requests on 26 June and 10 July 2024 regarding a blocked basin and toilet. There was no completion date noted in the landlord’s file for the 26 June 2024 order. The 10 July 2024 order was not attended to until 21 August 2024 during which a section of waste was renewed to stop the blockages. This therefore suggests the landlord did not complete all works necessary to remedy the matter until 21 August 2024 and the further delays from 26 June were unreasonable.
  12. The Ombudsman’s spotlight on repairs report emphasises the importance of landlords monitoring repeat repairs for effectiveness. While the landlord was responsive to most of the resident’s repair reports, given the recurrence of the blockages the landlord should have reviewed the effectiveness of previous repairs. It is not evident that the landlord considered a different approach to the actual blockages which was a missed opportunity to satisfy itself that the works completed were appropriate and effective.
  13. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 23 August 2024 where it acknowledged it could have done better, as it attended on more than one occasion. It further acknowledged it had at times failed to attend within its repair policy timeframes. The landlord sought to provide redress for its service failures by apologising and offering £200 compensation for the inconvenience caused and the impact its service failures had. This was appropriate, however there is no evidence the landlord fully assessed the inconvenience and distress caused by its service failures over a 16-month period.
  14. The resident told us that she only had one toilet in the property which was regularly blocked. She states this left the toilet unusable at points. She was left frustrated at the number of failed attempts required by the landlord to deal with the root cause of the blockages. She states she had to empty the bath by hand at times as the water was not running away correctly which again had a negative impact in the family’s living standards. Therefore, it is clear the issues with the bathroom have had a significant impact on the resident’s household and at times they did not have full access to toilet and washing facilities. Taking into account the length of the time the matter was ongoing, the inconvenience caused by the number of contractor appointments and the impact of the recurring issues with the bathroom, the landlord’s offer does not fully put things right.
  15. In the resident’s original complaint she had requested to be reimbursed for replacing her urine-stained bathroom flooring and furniture, however the landlord did not provide a response to this which was not appropriate. It would have been reasonable to have considered its own compensation policy which states it would consider reimbursing a specific financial loss as being a fair and proportionate remedy. Alternatively It would have been reasonable to have provided the resident its insurance details to allow her to make a claim against its policy. We have seen no evidence of any decision making or a timely response to this part of the complaint which was unreasonable. Due to the time passed and the likelihood the resident has disposed of the flooring and bathroom furniture it may be too late to pursue an insurance claim. We have therefore taken into account the landlord’s failure to address this aspect of the complaint when calculating the compensation order below.
  16. There were several missed opportunities for the landlord to put things right sooner than it did. The available evidence suggests that the repair works identified were a result of the initial bathroom installation which has not been fully acknowledged. The landlord has also not advised of any learning taken or measures put in place to avoid this error happening again. For all of these reasons we find there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repair issues to the bathroom.
  17. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay a further £500 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its delayed repairs. This brings the total amount of compensation to £700. This is in line with the landlord’s own compensation policy and our remedies’ guidance where there has been maladministration which had a significant impact on the resident. We have also made an order for the landlord to write to the resident and explain what went wrong and how it has improved its service so it does not happen again.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days at both stages of its complaints procedure. It further states it will respond to stage one complaints within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20 working days with a possible 10-day extension at either stage. This policy is in line with the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
  2. The landlord was responsive to the resident’s complaints and provided acknowledgments and responses within the timeframes listed above. The landlord provided its original stage one response on 1 March 2024, which the resident tried to escalate on 22 April 2024. The landlord however recorded this as a new complaint, which was inappropriate considering that it had already responded to a complaint about the same issue at stage one. The Code states “If all or part of the complaint is not resolved to the resident’s satisfaction at stage one, it must be progressed to stage 2 of the landlord’s procedure”. The landlord has since written to us acknowledging its service failure, however, has not advised of any learning taken or measures put in place to avoid this happening again. The service failure delayed the resident’s ability to bring her complaint to us which was unreasonable.
  3. In the landlord’s original complaint response (1 March 2024) it committed to ensure there was final sign off once any works were complete. It also stated it would confirm any compensation due in line with its compensation policy. There is no evidence of any decision making or that it had honoured either of these commitments which was not appropriate. The landlord has since written to us acknowledging this service failure, however, again it has not advised of any learning taken or measures put in place to avoid this error happening again.
  4. There is also evidence the resident was forced to continually chase the landlord for a reply after its stage 2 response. Although the landlord had provided the contact details for us to escalate her complaint to, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have maintained communication with the resident. The resident was left feeling ignored and having to escalate her complaint to attempt to have the landlord re-engage with her.
  5. Taking everything into account, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint as it has failed to follow its complaints procedure and prolonged that process unnecessarily. There were also communication failures after stage 2. We have therefore made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation for these failures. This is in line with our remedies guidance where the landlord’s failures had an adverse impact on the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handing of reports of repair issues to the bathroom.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £800 compensation (including the £200 already offered during its complaints process if it has not paid this already) comprising:
    1. £200 already offered during its internal process.
    2. Additional £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the bathroom repairs.
    3. Additional £100 for its complaint handling failures.
  2. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to write to the resident and explain what went wrong with the repairs and the measures it will take to avoid the same mistakes happening in the future.
  3. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should confirm to us compliance with the above orders.