Aster Group Limited (202429120)

Decision
Case ID	202429120
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Aster Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	15 October 2025

Background

1. The resident lives in a first floor flat of a block. There is a communal front door that provides access into the block. The resident pays a service charge for repairs and maintenance of the communal door.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of communal door repairs and the quality of works.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of communal door repairs and the quality of works.
5. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Handling of communal door repairs and the quality of works

6. The resident’s lease sets out she is obligated to pay service charges. The landlord appropriately attended to repairs between October 2021 until 7 October 2024. However, repairs which it identified on 7 October 2024 were not carried out until April 2025, outside its target timescales. 

Complaint handling

7. The landlord had not followed its complaints policy.

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 12 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 in compensation to recognise the additional inconvenience caused by its handling of communal door repairs and the quality of works.   This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance.	No later than 12 November 2025

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
8 August 2024	The resident raised her complaint on 8 August 2024 about issues with the communal door (starting from when she moved into the property), including the quality of previous repairs. She was dissatisfied with the number of repairs required and said it was a recurring issue. She believed she should not have to pay the service charge for these repairs.
28 August 2024	The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It said it had spoken to the resident on 16 August 2024. It did not uphold her complaint and said there was no evidence the communal door would need to be replaced. It said it repaired the door on 6 occasions between October 2021 and December 2023. As such, it would not reduce the service charge.
5 September 2024	On 5 September 2024 the resident reported the communal door was faulty and asked for her complaint to be escalated, which was acknowledged by the landlord on 11 September 2024.
16 October 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord did not uphold the complaint and told her it had not identified any service failures. However, it awarded £50 in compensation for the inconvenience of the resident having to report issues. It reiterated it would not reduce the service charge.   The landlord said it repaired the front communal door on 10 September 2024. On 11 September 2024 the resident reported the door would not open, the landlord repaired the door again on 11 September 2024 as an emergency. On that occasion it fitted a new door handle to help with a delay in the door being released. On both occasions the door was tested, and left in working condition.   The landlord said it had spoken with the resident on 27 September 2024 and she believed the door was not fixed. The landlord provided the resident with a direct point of contact, this was for repairs after its inspection on 7 October 2024.
Referral to the Ombudsman	By 29 October 2024 the resident asked us to investigate her concerns about the communal door. She was dissatisfied with the landlord’s responses as she believed the communal door was not working. On 8 April 2025 the landlord completed repairs to the communal door which it had identified on 7 October 2024. The resident told us on 14 May 2025 that the door was fixed.

 

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	Handling of communal door repairs and the quality of works
Finding	Service failure

8. Under the resident’s lease, the landlord is responsible for repairs to the common parts, which includes the communal door.
9. The landlord attended to 6 repairs between 2021 and 2023 in line with its door access and maintenance service policy (20 working days). The landlord’s response about these repairs and the door not needing renewal was reasonable, given that the 6 call outs were over a 2 year period.
10. Following the resident’s reports on 5 September 2024, the landlord carried out repairs to the communal door on 10 September 2024 in line with its 20 working day target.
11. When the resident told the landlord the door would not open after the above repair, it completed emergency repairs inside its 24 hour target and appropriately inspected the quality of its work.
12. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the professional opinion of its contractors. At that stage, the contractors did not recommend that the door required replacement. Therefore, it was also reasonable for the landlord to have attempted repairs to the communal door.
13. The landlord visited the property on 7 October 2024 following further reports by the resident. This was also in line with its policy. However, the repairs it identified were not carried out until 8 April 2025. This exceeded the landlord’s 20 working day timescale, and it had not proactively updated the resident. Had the landlord considered its inspection record of 7 October 2024, and assessed it in line with its policy, it is likely it would have mitigated additional inconvenience caused to the resident.
14. The evidence showed the resident received the services she was paying for. If the resident disputes the level or fairness of the service charge, she could potentially approach the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

15. The landlord’s complaints policy says it would send a written acknowledgement within 5 working days. The landlord failed to evidence it acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its internal complaints procedure. By not doing so, was a record keeping failure. We acknowledge the stage 1 complaint response was sent within 10 working days after it discussed the complaint with the resident on 16 August 2024.
16. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response 5 working days over its target time. The landlord had not explained to the resident why it was not possible to provide its response in 20 working days, in line with its complaints policy.
17. The landlord did not address the above complaint handling failings in its final response.

Learning

18. Had the landlord promptly actioned repairs to the communal door which it was aware of from 7 October 2024, we would have found no maladministration for this complaint point.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

19. The landlord did not monitor the repairs it identified from its inspection of 7 October 2024, despite committing to do so in its final response.
20. As above there is no record of a written stage 1 complaint acknowledgement.

Communication

21. The landlord’s communication was poor regarding what steps it would or would not take following its inspection of 7 October 2024.
22. As above the landlord did not agree an extension to its stage 2 complaint response with the resident.