London Borough of Waltham Forest (202333291)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202333291

London Borough of Waltham Forest

31 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

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reported repairs.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling as part of the investigation.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority. He lives in a studio flat and his tenancy started on 14 August 2009.
On 20 March 2023 the resident raised a report about a sink leak in the kitchen. The landlord arranged for operatives to attend during March 2023, however they were not able to gain access.
In May 2023 following a report from the resident about the condition of his home, the landlord arranged an inspection. This found that several repairs were required. This included repairs to doors, the door frame, decoration and to plaster.
On 3 July 2023 an operative attended to carry out repairs, however there was no access. The operative noted on the records that a day was needed to carry out repairs. Further appointments were scheduled between 31 July 2023 and 5 September 2023 to carry out repairs.
On 4 August 2023 the resident raised a complaint about the ongoing repairs needed. He explained that he was informed these works could be completed in 1 day, however this was not done. He said this was impacting on his work.
On 17 August 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 response. It explained the works scheduled were multi-trade and therefore it was not possible to deliver the works in a single day. It found no evidence to suggest the resident was told otherwise. The landlord acknowledged a delay in actioning the works. In recognition of this failure, it awarded £100 compensation to the resident.
The resident escalated his complaint on 19 September 2023 about the landlord’s handling of repairs. He was seeking for all outstanding works to be completed without further delay.
On 16 October 2023 the landlord inspected the resident’s property. It found repairs to the fire door were outstanding. Repairs to the plaster and decoration were done to a poor standard. It also raised repairs needed for the sink leak.
On 25 October 2023 the landlord issued a stage 2 response. It recognised difficulty in accessing the resident’s home to complete repairs and stated this contributed to scheduling delays. However it agreed it could have been strategic in scheduling visits. In recognition of the delays and inconvenience the landlord offered £250 compensation. This replaced its original offer. Following this, some repair works were carried out in November 2023.
On 26 April 2024 the resident explained to us there were several inaccuracies in the landlord’s stage 2 response. He said that multiple works were left incomplete with a promise to return, but he had not heard back from the landlord. He said:
1. Several repairs had not been completed on 3 August 2023 as stated.
2. Fire door was still outstanding.
3. Kitchen door frame was still damaged, however the landlord said this was completed.
4. Decoration was completed to a poor finish.
During July 2024 the resident complained about the ongoing repairs to the landlord. The landlord found there were repairs outstanding and asked its contractors to schedule appointments with the resident. The landlord also informed us that its contractors’ policy had changed and it now allowed weekend works, which was to be discussed with the resident.
On 20 September 2025 the resident informed us that some repairs were still outstanding and others were done to a poor standard. This included reports of repairs to the countertop, kitchen cupboards, kitchen fire door and frame.
We have seen the landlord’s repair records from 2023 until present. The landlord explained it had experience access issues when trying to carry out repairs.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

We have considered whether the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of repairs and his complaint in line with its policies.
The resident raised concerns about the quality of repairs carried out. We have not seen evidence to show the landlord looked into these matters. As these new issues were raised after the landlord’s internal complaints process was completed, we have not considered them. We have however made a recommendation that the landlord contacts the resident to check the details of any concerns he has about the quality of the completed works.

Repairs

The landlord’s repairs policy and the tenancy agreement confirm it is responsible for maintaining the property’s structure, the services and fittings. The landlord will complete routine repairs within 21 days. It aims to complete specialist works within 45 days.
The repair records show that on 20 March 2023the resident raised concerns about a kitchen sink leak. The landlord arranged for its operatives to attend on 10 May 2023, however there was no access. The landlord’s records do not clarify why this appointment was missed by the resident or if its contractors left a card. We also have not seen evidence to show if the landlord made attempts to reschedule this appointment at the time. The evidence shows the resident was chasing repairs in September 2023. In October 2023, following an inspection, the landlord raised repairs for a leak to the sink.
We have seen evidence in December 2023 that the resident continued to chase repairs to the sink. It is unclear when repairs were completed, however the resident confirmed on 2 July 2024 that the repair to the sink had been completed.
We find the landlord has not demonstrated that it dealt with the resident’s requests for repairs to the sink reasonably. Its records fail to confirm when the works were completed. We have not seen evidence to confirm that repairs were completed within a reasonable timeframe in line with its policies.
The landlord raised several repairs following a survey on 22 May 2023. These were to renew the fire door, plaster wall, redecorate the room and repair kitchen door frame. We find it was appropriate for the landlord to carry out an inspection to assess the condition of the property and repair issues raised. This enabled the landlord to see what action was needed to take to meet its repair obligations.
The resident complained that he was informed works could be carried out in a single day, however this was not done. The resident said this impacted his work, causing him distress, inconvenience and a loss of income.
In its stage 2 response the landlord said there was no evidence that it told the resident the works could be completed in a day. However on 3 July 2023 the operative’s note on the landlord’s repair records said that it needed 1 day to carry out repairs. This included work to the front door, door frame, internal light, and to paint walls white.
The works were not completed on the same day, despite the operative’s notes that this could be done. While there is no record of what was said to the resident, the operative’s notes and actions are inconsistent. We understand that sometimes works take longer than needed, but it is important that landlords manage residents’ expectations with repairs to prevent disruption.
In accordance with the repairs policy, the landlord should have completed the majority of works within 21 days, except for the fire door repairs which required a specialist. The repair records show that its contractors attended between July and September 2023 to carry out standard repairs.
This exceeded the landlord’s repair timescales of 21 days. We recognise that it had attempted repairs on 10 and 15 July, but no access was gained despite the resident confirming availability. While this shows some effort, it only partially mitigates the delay as the landlord was still responsible for ensuring timely completion.
We find the landlord’s delay of nearly two months before attempting the repairs to be unreasonable. It failed to adhere to its own policy which caused avoidable distress and inconvenience to the resident. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to update the resident about expected delays during this time, however this was not done.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord confirmed it carried out an inspection on 16 October 2023. This was a positive step for the landlord to review the status of works. This helped it to confirm which repairs from the May 2023 survey remained outstanding or were of a poor finish. We find the inspection was helpful in identifying required works, however it would have been appropriate for this to have taken place sooner to avoid prolonged inconvenience to the resident.
The operative’s note on 18 October 2023 said that the resident had declined to have works completed unless this was done at the weekend. However repairs started in November 2023 and follow on works were required. This impacted the resident further. He also raised concerns about unscheduled repairs.
There is no evidence the landlord carried out any further works from December 2023 until July 2024.
The landlord said the reason for the delay was due to the resident refusing works, unless these were done at the weekend. We understand the resident has disputed this claim. Overall we find the landlord did not demonstrate that it had engaged effectively with the resident to resolve the outstanding repairs. This is because whilst it states the resident’s request for work on the weekend caused delays, there is no evidence the landlord made attempts to look at alternative arrangements.
When the resident wrote to the landlord on 2 July 2024 about the condition of his property, it raised outstanding repairs with its contractors. It confirmed that 2 repairs remained outstanding to the front door and to plaster the wall switch. We find the length of time these repairs were outstanding to be unreasonably long. The landlord therefore failed to demonstrate that it carried out repairs in line with its repair obligations and timeframe.
The landlord informed us in July 2024 that its contractors had changed their policy to include weekend work. It said it would instruct its contractors to contact the resident to arrange outstanding works. We have not seen evidence to confirm if this was done. However the repair records confirm the front door was renewed on 16 October 2024.
We acknowledge the resident says repairs to the fire door are outstanding. We have seen evidence to confirm that the work order to install the door was completed.
The repair records also state that decorative works were completed in October 2024. It is unclear whether this included plastering to the wall switch. However we have not seen any further record to indicate this repair remained outstanding or that the resident continued to chase it.
Overall we find the landlord’s records to be unclear. It is unreasonable that the landlord’s evidence does not demonstrate that the plaster work was completed.
In summary, the landlord failed to carry out repairs within its own policy timescales and did not keep accurate and comprehensive records. This contributed to delays, incomplete works and avoidable distress and inconvenience for the resident. Given the failing identified and length of time repairs remained outstanding, we find the landlord’s actions amounted to maladministration.
In its stage 2 response the landlord also identified failings. We acknowledge the landlord previously offered the resident £250 compensation in 2023 for its failures. The offer would have been reasonable if the landlord had then carried out repairs in a reasonable timeframe. However the repairs remained outstanding for a further 11 months. Therefore we find the compensation does not fully reflect the impact on the resident.
The landlord’s compensation policy says it awards between £100 to £600 where:
1. There has been service failure which adversely affected the customer but has not had a permanent impact.
2. It has failed to acknowledge there was service failure.
3. It acknowledged service failure but failed to provide a remedy.
We have therefore made an order for the landlord to pay the resident an additional £400. This is in recognition of the overall distress and inconvenience. This amount also reflects the ongoing issues past the end of its internal complaints procedure.

Complaint handling.

There was inaccuracy in the landlord’s stage 2 response. The landlord stated that repairs were completed in August 2023, however these repairs remained outstanding. The evidence shows this was later confirmed by the landlord. Although the landlord’s repair records do not reflect this error, the information provided in its formal response was inaccurate.
This demonstrated poor investigation and consideration of the matter. This caused the resident further distress. We have found that there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
The landlord’s compensation policy awards £50 to £100 where there has been a service failure which had minimal impact on the resident. Our remedies guidance suggests up to £100 compensation for service failure. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation. This amount fairly reflects its failure and the impact on the resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Order.

The landlord to pay the resident an additional £500 compensation. This includes:
1. £400 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of his repairs reports.
2. £100 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling.
If not done so already, the landlord to pay its previous offer of £250 compensation.
The landlord to contact the resident to discuss outstanding works. Following this discussion, it should confirm in writing to both the resident and our service the actions it intends to take.
We order the landlord to take the above action within 4 working weeks of the date of this report. The landlord must provide us with evidence that it has complied with these orders.