Sanctuary Housing Association (202340222)

Background

1. The resident moved to her property in October 2023 and was unhappy with its condition. She said there were outstanding repairs which the landlord should have completed while the property was empty.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Outstanding repairs.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s outstanding repairs.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s outstanding repairs

4. There were outstanding repairs in the property which the landlord did not complete during its void stage. Its communication was poor, and it did not keep the resident updated.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

5. The landlord did not address all the issues raised by the resident in its stage 1 response. It did not respond to the resident’s stage 2 complaint in line with its policy timescale.

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.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

What we did not investigate

6. The resident raised issues about a roof repair which has not exhausted the landlord’s complaint’s procedure. We have no power to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the chance to put right first. The resident did not raise the roof repair as part of her complaint. Therefore, we have not investigated the landlord’s handling of her roof repair.

What we did investigate

7. The resident’s tenancy started on 23 October 2023. Before she moved in, the landlord inspected the property and identified work which it completed on 21 September 2023. This included work to clear gutter blockages, renew taps, waste pipe, shower fittings and worktop.
8. After a visit to the property, the resident contacted the landlord on 21 and 22 October 2023 about several issues she was unhappy with. This included items left in the loft, loose floorboards, a fallen radiator, dirty toilet, broken guttering, shower case and stairs spindle. She asked it to replace her front door and bedroom windows as she believed they were beyond repair. She also reported the kitchen window air vents did not work and showed signs of forced entry.
9. Following contact from the resident, the landlord inspected the property on 24 October 2023. Its inspection identified 14 issues that required work including repairs to the guttering, floorboards, staircase, cupboard door, kitchen tap, bathroom and shower. It said it completed this work on 26 October 2023 which was in line with its 15 working day timescale for standard repairs.
10. The resident said the landlord should have identified the repairs she raised and completed them before her tenancy started. The landlord’s voids policy says it aims to ensure the property meets the appropriate standard for letting but does not explain how a property meets the standards. Internal landlord communication shows it accepted it should have completed several of the repairs during its void stage and it questioned why the property passed its post inspection. It said it did not complete a handover when the property was handed back. It missed an opportunity to identify and address repairs before the resident moved in.
11. During its inspection on 24 October 2023, the landlord also found the windows had severe damage and it would need to replace them and the front door. It returned the next day to measure them for replacement. Its policy does not include timescales for replacement of windows or doors, but it has a 45-working day timescale for planned repairs. It replaced the windows and door on 21 February 2024.
12. Before moving into the property, the resident asked the landlord if it planned to replace her 2 skylights as she believed single glazing was inadequate. It said it was unlikely as they were in working order. On 25 October 2023 she reported a crack in one skylight and on 29 October 2023, she reported the cracked skylight did not fully open. Due to no response, she raised the issue in her stage 1 complaint, but the landlord did not address it in its response. She contacted it again and it told her it was liaising with its property services and would be in contact. After receiving no further update, the resident escalated her complaint.
13. In its stage 2 response, the landlord confirmed an appointment for 15 April 2024 to assess the skylights. It attended that day and found both did not fully open and one was cracked. It raised work for this on 2 May 2024 and said it replaced both skylights on 18 December 2024. It said it experienced delays due to access issues and asbestos removal but did not provide evidence of its repair attempts or efforts to manage the resident’s expectations about the repair timeframe.
14. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs was poor. Where repairs are more complex or take longer than expected, we expect landlords to keep residents fully updated and manage their expectations. The resident contacted the landlord repeatedly for updates. Its lack of communication and delay caused her time and trouble complaining and escalating her complaint. Its stage 2 response was also inaccurate. It said her front door was due to be reviewed for replacement in 2033, her windows in 2034and it had arranged an appointment to assess both on 15 April 2024. However, it had already replaced them at that stage. This was likely to cause the resident confusion and affect her trust in its handling of her repair.
15. In view of the repair delays, the landlord’s poor communication and its failure to complete repairs and checks before letting the property, we found maladministration.
16. In its stage 1 response, the landlord apologised for its poor communication and accepted the resident moved into the property with outstanding repairs. It offered £100 compensation for any distress and inconvenience caused. In its stage 2 response, it offered £100 as a goodwill gesture for repair delays but did not say whether this was in addition to its stage 1 offer. For our assessment, we considered it to be in addition. We do not consider its total offer of £200 proportionate to the failings identified. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident an additional £300 which is in line with our remedies guidance for failings which adversely affected the resident.

17. The landlord’s complaints policy said it would respond at stage 1 within 10 working days, and at stage 2 within 20 working days of an escalation request. This was in line with our complaint handling code in use at the time (2022).
18. The landlord sent its stage 1 response 16 working days after the resident raised her complaint. Its policy allows for an extension of an additional 10 working days if it requires further investigation and it wrote to her about this. However, it was already over the 10-working day timescale when it wrote to her about the delay. Its response was also poor as it failed to address the skylight issue.
19. The landlord sent its stage 2 response 27 working days after the resident’s escalation request. This was not in line with its policy, which said it must respond within 20 working days of the complaint escalation unless it agreed an extension.
20. Due to the above failings, we found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation. This is in line with our remedies guidance for failures which the landlord did not acknowledge.

Learning

21. The landlord should review its void, allocations and letting policy to ensure it is clear about how a property meets its letting standards.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord told us it completed the additional void repairs on 26 October 2023. However its internal communications suggest it completed it on 27 October 2023, but its repair form has a completion date of 14 November 2023. It should ensure its repair records are accurate.
23. The landlord did not provide evidence of updating and managing the resident’s expectations during her sky light repair.

Communication

24. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor. It should consider how it can improve its communication with residents for repair updates.