Hyde Housing Association Limited (202507416)

Decision
Case ID	202507416
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Hyde Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	5 December 2025

Background

The resident lives in a 2-bedroom flat with her son, who is autistic. She has mental health issues, and the landlord is aware of this. She reported problems to the landlord about the electrics tripping, draughts from windows and doors and kitchen repairs.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The resident’s concerns about electrical safety.
2. The resident’s reports of draughty windows and doors.
3. The resident’s reports of kitchen repairs.
We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

The landlord was responsible for:
1. Maladministration in its handling of concerns about electrical safety
2. Maladministration in its handling of reports of draughty windows and doors.
We found the landlord offered:
1. Reasonable redress for its handling of reports of kitchen repairs.
2. Reasonable redress for its complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Electrical safety

There was no evidence that the landlord carried out a proper electrical inspection despite the resident’s reports of the electrics tripping, especially given the household’s circumstances.

Draughty windows and doors

There was no evidence that the landlord carried out repairs to the bedroom window and back door that it said it had in its final response.

Kitchen repairs

The landlord’s offer of compensation for the delayed kitchen repairs was fair and proportionate.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s offer of compensation for its delayed complaint responses was fair and proportionate.

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 14 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £400 made up as follows: £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of concerns about electrical safety. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of reports of draughty windows and doors. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 14 January 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. 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 it: Inspects the electrics and all windows and doors of the property and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards The most likely cause of the electrics tripping and the draughts from the doors and windows. 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 resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works	No later than 14 January 2026
4	Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the work to replace the bedroom window handle and repair the back door is completed promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot complete the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will finish the works; or Explain the steps it has taken to ensure the works were completed and provide supporting evidence. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident until the work is completed.	No later than 21 January 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should carry out a damp and mould inspection.
The landlord should inspect the kitchen to confirm it is fit for purpose and that there are no outstanding repairs.
The landlord should pay the resident £350 compensation as offered in its final response if it has not already done so. This Service has found reasonable redress for the kitchen repairs and its complaint handling based on this amount being paid to the resident.
The landlord should pay the resident £600 compensation as offered in its March 2024 final response if it has not already done so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
25 September 2024	The resident made a formal complaint. She said that 2 weeks ago, her electric board started tripping and would not turn on. She said the landlord told her it was her responsibility to resolve. She also said the kitchen repairs were still incomplete, and the area was unsafe.
16 October 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It said it had arranged for a surveyor to inspect the kitchen on 30 October 2024. It also said its electrician visited on 24 September 2024 and told the resident that the cooker was faulty and that white goods were her responsibility to replace.
30 December 2024	The resident asked to escalate the complaint. She said her kitchen was still in disrepair. She disputed that her cooker was faulty and explained that the electrics were still tripping. She also complained that her windows and doors were draughty and letting in a constant breeze. She said the landlord’s failure to complete repairs meant she could not arrange a mutual exchange, which she needed because of her son’s needs.
10 February 2025	The landlord issued its final stage 2 response. It admitted it had not completed all the kitchen repairs when it should have and apologised for its poor communication. It said it had arranged several kitchen repairs for 5 February 2025. It confirmed that it visited on 23 January 2025 and found no evidence of the electrics tripping. It added that although the windows and doors were not part of the original complaint, it would replace the bedroom window handle and fix the back door to close the gap at the bottom. The landlord offered £350 compensation: £50 for time and trouble, £200 for kitchen repair delays and the distress and inconvenience caused, and £100 for failures in its complaint handling.
Referral to the Ombudsman	In her referral to us, the resident said delays in completing repairs had affected her household’s well-being and stopped her from moving. She disputed that the landlord had checked the electrics and said this cost her a lot of money to replace appliances, and she felt unsafe. She also explained that draughty windows and doors forced her to keep the heating on constantly in winter, which caused mould to grow. She wanted the landlord to fully repair the kitchen instead of patching it up, make sure the electrics were safe, and pay further compensation.

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	The handling of the resident’s concerns about electrical safety
Finding	Maladministration

In its stage 1 response, the landlord said that an electrician visited the property on 24 September 2024 and told the resident her cooker was faulty. However, there is no record of this visit, so it is unclear what checks were carried out. This matters because the resident disputed that the electrics had been checked. This shows poor record-keeping, and we have highlighted this as a learning point below.
The landlord’s records show a follow-up electrical repair appointment was booked for 27 September 2024. However, it is unclear what the repair was for, whether the appointment took place, or if the electrics were checked on that date. This suggests further issues with record-keeping.
In her escalation request, the resident reported that the electrics were still tripping. In its final response, the landlord stated that during its visit on 23 January 2025, it found no evidence of this. However, there is no record showing the electrics were inspected or tested.
With no evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to conclude the landlord did not carry out a proper electrical check, such as inspecting the consumer unit or testing the circuits and wiring. This caused distress and inconvenience to the resident, who said she felt unsafe a spent a lot of money replacing appliances. And it is unclear whether this was necessary. This amounts to maladministration. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £200 in compensation and complete an electrical inspection.

Complaint	The handling of the resident’s reports of draughty windows and doors
Finding	Maladministration

After the resident raised this issue in her escalation request, the landlord replaced the bedroom window gasket on 5 February 2025. This was broadly in line with its routine repair timescales, and it was reasonable to complete the work at the same time as the kitchen repairs.
In its final response, the landlord stated that on 5 February 2025 it replaced the bedroom window handle and overhauled the back door to close the gap at the bottom. However, there is no evidence to confirm this, and the resident told us these repairs were not carried out.
This was contrary to the landlord’s repair policy timescales and caused distress and inconvenience to the resident, who said she had to keep her heating on constantly during winter. She also said that condensation was building up, leading to mould spreading across all windows and the balcony door.
This amounts to maladministration. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £200 in compensation and complete the bedroom window and door repairs if it has not already been done. The landlord must also inspect all windows and doors to ensure they are fit for purpose. In addition, we have recommended a full damp and mould inspection.

Complaint	The handling of the resident’s reports of kitchen repairs
Finding	Reasonable redress

The landlord accepts that there were failings in how it handled the resident’s reports. When this happens, we assess if the complaint was resolved fairly and if the landlord offered suitable redress. We also look at whether the landlord followed our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
After the resident’s complaint, the landlord inspected the kitchen on 30 October 2024 and found that it needed to carry out several repairs, including overhauling the worktop and corner units and fixing the kitchen drawers. Although it completed some repairs in November 2024, many remained outstanding. The landlord’s records show this was due to an unclear work order. This caused distress to the resident, who said the kitchen was unsafe and said it was affecting her ability to move.
The landlord carried out another inspection in January 2025 and again found several repairs were needed. It is unclear why the landlord did not arrange this inspection sooner, given the household circumstances and previous issues with kitchen repairs. The landlord completed the repairs on 6 February 2025. This delay was contrary to its repair policy timescales and caused distress and inconvenience to the resident, who was unable to fully enjoy her kitchen for almost 5 months.
In its final response, the landlord acknowledged the delays in completing the kitchen repairs, recognised its communication was poor, and offered £250 compensation. It also identified learning from the complaint, including introducing a new complaints commitment officer to oversee commitments through to completion. This was a reasonable way to put things right, and the compensation offer was in line with our remedies guidance, which suggests awards starting at £100 where failings have adversely affected a resident.
The resident told us the kitchen is half new and half old, creating a ‘mismatched’ look. Under the landlord’s repair obligations, it only needs to ensure the kitchen is functional and fit for habitation. Although records show repairs were carried out in November 2024 and February 2025, and mentioned a post-inspection, the repairs listed in the landlord’s February 2025 final response were the same as those in a previous complaint response from March 2024. And its records show these were completed in April 2024. This is confusing.
In late February 2025, the resident told the landlord that the repairs had already been completed as part of a previous complaint. She also told us that old drawers keep falling out, forcing her to replace them. This suggests the same issues may be recurring. We have therefore recommended that the landlord inspect the kitchen to confirm there are no outstanding repairs and ensure it is fit for purpose.
The resident also told us that the £600 compensation offered by the landlord in its March 2024 complaint response about kitchen repairs has not been paid. Although this does not form part of this investigation, we recommend that the landlord honour this commitment.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

The landlord took 16 working days to respond to the resident’s complaint, slightly outside its stage 1 policy timescale. It also took 30 working days to respond at stage 2, exceeding its 20-working-day policy timescale. This was also contrary to our Complaint Handling Code.
However, the landlord acknowledged these delays, apologised, and offered £100 compensation. It also identified learning, such as implementing a new customer management system to track complaints.
The landlord’s remedies were fair and addressed the frustration caused by its delayed complaint responses. The landlord should pay the £100 compensation offered if it has not already done so.

Learning

The landlord should ensure repairs meet policy timescales and schedule follow-up inspections promptly, especially where electrical safety is involved.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

There were record-keeping issues in this case. The landlord should ensure it keeps accurate records of all visits and inspections. Good record keeping will allow it to evidence its actions and adherence to policies. The landlord should also ensure that records reconcile with complaint responses to avoid confusion.

Communication

In this case, the records do not show if the landlord regularly updated the resident about the status of repairs. Landlords should let residents know what to expect regarding repairs and provide a clear schedule for visits.