Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

City of Westminster Council (202346824)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202346824

City of Westminster Council

9 October  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:
    1. A repair to the property’s intercom system.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord who is a local authority. The property is a flat in a block of flats with a communal intercom.
  2. The resident made 6 service requests for a broken intercom system during October and November 2023.
  3. The resident sent the landlord her formal complaint on 3 December 2023. She complained several attempts had been made to fix the intercom system and that the landlord had been able to partially repair it. The door release button was however not working. She said she was told on 16 November a quote had been created by the landlord’s contractor for parts needed to make the repair. She said she had asked for updates but did not get a response.
  4. The landlord sent the resident its stage 1 complaint response on 13 December 2023. It acknowledged it had attended several service requests relating to the intercom system. It partially upheld the resident’s complaint as its contractor had told the resident a quote had been issued and hadn’t been approved at the time. It apologised as this was incorrect information. It said the quote was not processed and received by the landlord until 11 December 2023, and it was approved that day. It committed to make the repair once the parts were received.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 18 December 2023. She was unhappy with inconsistencies in the landlord’s communication as she was told the quote was rejected and the stage 1 response said it took longer for the quote to be received by the landlord. The resident said the repair was reported in September 2023 and wanted financial redress for the delay. The resident was unhappy the landlord continued to attempt repairs, rather than replace.
  6. The landlord sent the resident its stage 2 complaint response on 25 March 2024. It upheld her complaint and offered her £100 compensation for the delay in completing works. It apologised for the delayed response and lack of updates and offered £50 compensation for its complaint handling failure. It offered a further £50 compensation for its delays in providing her updates on the intercom system repair.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint to us requesting increased compensation to reflect the inconvenience the delay had caused.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of a repair to the property’s intercom system

  1. The landlord’s repair policy states that it will complete non-emergency repairs within 28 days, and that it is responsible for repairs to the property’s intercom systems. The policy also states that door entry phone repairs are a qualifying repair under the right to repair scheme and must be completed within 7 days.
  2. The resident reported that she could not hear the intercom on 5 September 2023. The landlord’s repair log shows it attempted to contact the resident by phone and letter on 3 separate occasions before cancelling the repair on 2 October 2023. The landlord’s action’s were reasonable and resulted in the resident replying to it on 12 October 2023 to arrange the repair.
  3. The repair logs indicate that the landlord replaced the resident’s handset on 17 October 2023. This was 5 days after the resident contacted the landlord in October to arrange the repair. The landlord’s response was reasonable and in line with the right to repair scheme guidelines.
  4. It is not in dispute that there were further intermittent problems with the main communal intercom. The landlord attended to several service requests made by the resident in October and November 2023. The landlord attended each report within the right to repair guidelines of 7 days. This was a reasonable response.
  5. Landlord’s should ensure a prudent, planned approach to repairs and maintenance of homes. It should demonstrate an appropriate balance of planned and responsive repairs, and value for money. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to attempt repairs prior to planning a costly upgrade to the system. The landlord’s contractor appropriately identified during its visit on 9 November 2023 that it would upgrade the communal intercom system due to multiple repair visits and parts no longer being available. This was a reasonable response. The landlord is entitled to rely on the advice of the specialist contractors that it engages and there is no evidence to show it was informed at an earlier stage that replacement should be considered.
  6. The landlord’s file shows it had to chase this with its contractor on 24 November 2023 and 1, 7, 8 December 2023. Although it is positive the landlord was being proactive it would have been appropriate for it to have chased the contractor sooner in November and more frequently following this. Ultimately the landlord is responsible for its contractor’s actions and therefore for the unreasonable delay in the quote being submitted.
  7. The landlord appropriately approved the quote the day it was received on 11 December 2023. The landlord’s file shows the parts were ordered the following day and received on 17 January 2024. The landlord communicated to the resident on 26 January 2024 that it was required to give residents 2 weeks’ notice, due to the potential disruption during the repair. However, there was a further delay following this as the works were not completed until 27 February 2024. It was unreasonable that there was a further unexplained delay, after the parts were received and the residents notified.
  8. Landlords have a responsibility to ensure timely and relevant communication with affected residents to manage expectations and minimise distress and frustration. The resident repeatedly sought updates and made the complaint in order to seek information and progress the repair. The landlord and its contractors communication should have been better managed to assure the resident when the planned works were taking place. The landlord was unable to evidence it had done so, which was not appropriate.
  9. In the landlord’s stage 1 response (13 December 2023) it explained the initial delay was caused as it had not received the quote from its contractor until 11 December 2023. It apologised the resident had been provided misleading information and committed to complete the repair once its contractor had received the parts. The landlord’s clarification of what happened and its commitment to make the repair were reasonable steps to take at this stage. 
  10. In the landlord’s stage 2 response (25 March 2023) it apologised for the repair delays and for its contractor’s poor communication. It offered £100 compensation for the repair delay and a further £50 for its delay in providing updates. It showed learning by advising it would speak with its contractor to ensure any future repairs are improved. It also committed to improve its communication. We have seen evidence it did this and put in place procedures to ensure work is processed quickly and that repairs are completed within its repair policy guidelines.
  11. The landlord’s compensation policy states it will offer discretionary compensation of between £100 to £600 where there has been a significant delay which resulted in distress and inconvenience, where the resident has had to chase responses and seek corrections of mistakes that required multiple visits. The available evidence indicates that the resident was able to hear the intercom after the handset was replaced, but the door release was not working. The resident has explained that she missed several deliveries as a result.
  12. The landlord’s total offer of compensation (£150) is on the lower level of its scale. However considering the impact on the resident and the complexities of the repair (including ordering the parts), the landlord’s offer of £150 was proportionate. Although it was undoubtedly inconvenient that the door release was not working, it is reasonable to assume that the resident was still able to let visitors into the building by opening the door. This overall inconvenience has been acknowledged and appropriate compensation offered by the landlord.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints procedure, which is in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days of receipt. The landlord will aim to provide a response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and at stage 2 within 20 working days. It will agree any extension to these timescales with the resident.
  2. The stage 1 complaint was responded to within target timescales, however there was a delay at stage 2. The resident escalated her complaint on 18 December 2023 and received an acknowledgement that day. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 25 March 2024. That was a total of 68 working days, which was 28 days (including a possible 20-day extension) beyond what it permits in its policy above.
  3. The landlord apologised for its delay on 5 February 2024 (33 working days) and 27 February 2024 (48 working days). In each of these emails it did not evidence it had agreed an extension with the resident or explain why its response was delayed. The resident would have been left with uncertainty about when she would receive a response. This caused the resident to seek advice from us about progressing her complaint. The landlord’s delayed response and failure to adhere to its own complaints policy and the Code was unreasonable.
  4. Although the landlord acknowledged its poor communication, apologised for its delayed response and offered £50 compensation, it did not go far enough. It failed to fully acknowledge the distress and inconvenience caused by such a lengthy delay or explain what went wrong. It has not evidenced it had taken any learning to ensure it did not happen again. For these reasons there has been service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. We have made an order for the landlord to pay a total £100 compensation (including £50 previously offered). We have also made an order for the landlord to write to the resident and explain what went wrong and any learning it has taken to improve its complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of reasonable redress which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolved the complaint about its handling of a repair to the properties intercom system.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handing of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation (including the £50 already offered during its complaints process if it has not paid this already) for its complaint handling failure.
  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 and any learning it has taken to improve its complaint handling.
  3. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should confirm to us compliance with the above orders.

Recommendation

  1. If not paid already, the Ombudsman recommends the landlord pays the resident the £150 compensation it offered as redress for its handling of the repair to the intercom system.