City of York Council (202324420)

A blue and grey text

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202324420

City of York Council

4 September 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 complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s windows.
We have also considered the associated complaint.

Background

The resident has been a secure tenant of the property since 31 January 2023. The landlord is a local authority. The property is a 1-bedroom ground-floor property.
Between 21 March 2023 and 11 May 2023, the resident reported several window problems.
On 21 June 2023, the resident’s MP contacted the landlord on her behalf. They explained that:
1. The resident and her family could not open the windows in her home.
2. The windows included secondary double glazing and an old-fashioned sash window that they could not open.
3. Two smaller side windows were stuck and would not open.
4. The resident was informed the property is in a conservation area and new windows may not be permitted.
5. The resident asked the landlord to send someone to explore workable solutions.
On 7 August 2023, the landlord responded to the MP by email. It said it had eased the windows where possible. It explained that conservation area rules limited replacement window options and that its Capital Team carried out planned works for window replacements.
On 5 September 2023, the landlord provided a further update to the MP. It said the windows were modern sash style but could be hard to open, especially with secondary glazing. An occupational therapist had checked the windows but could not find a solution. The landlord said it would fix any repairs needed but had no plan to replace the windows.
On 8 September 2023, the resident called the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2 and said:
1. the repairs team had visited several times to carry out work to her windows, but they still would not open.
2. she had been advised to contact the landlord when she wanted to open a window, but this was not an ideal situation.
3. she had several health conditions, and the lack of fresh air was making feel unwell.
4. she was not asking for replacement windows, just windows that function as they are intended to do.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 11 September 2023.
On 24 November 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. The landlord acknowledged delays in issuing the stage 2 response and said:
1. It confirmed that the windows were hard to open, especially with the secondary glazing in place.
2. The design of the windows was not suitable for residents with limited strength.
3. The only current resolution was for joiners to attend and ease the windows when needed.
4. The resident was advised to contact the landlord for assistance each time window access was needed.
5. It noted that side opening casement windows may be more suitable, however, there were no current plans or budget in place to replace the windows at the block.
6. It confirmed the complaint was partially upheld because of the limited options available.
The landlord made recommendations in its stage 2 response:
1. Within 1 month, it would provide written instructions on who to contact out of hours for window assistance.
2. Within 1 month, it would write to the resident confirming whether funding for new windows was in place in the next budget and planned works review.

Events after completion of the internal complaints process

On 6 December 2023, the resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said she could not open her windows. She explained that she was older and had difficulty using the windows. The landlord had offered to send someone to open them when needed, but she preferred to open them herself for ease and independence.
The resident reports that issues with the windows are ongoing and haven’t been resolved.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident reports that issues with the windows remain. In accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme, we are unable to consider complaints about matters that have not yet exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. Therefore, this assessment has focussed on the period from 21 March 2023, which is when the resident first reported difficulties opening her windows, up to the landlord’s stage 2 response dated 24 November 2023. Reference to historical and more recent events is to provide context only. If the resident is unhappy with the landlord’s response to more recent reports, she can raise these as a new complaint to the landlord. If the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response to her new complaint, she may be able to refer the matter to us to investigate as a separate complaint.
Throughout the complaint the resident raised the impact the repair to the windows had on her mental health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the residents’ concerns, however, as this Service is an informal alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider any personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint as these matters are better suited for consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. If the resident wishes to pursue this aspect of the complaint, they will need to obtain independent legal advice or contact the landlords’ insurers.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s windows

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 requires the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house.
The landlord’s responsive repair policy states that it has 2 repair timescales: same day and general repairs. The landlord aims to respond to same day repair within 4 hours to make safe. The landlord aims to complete general repairs within 20 working days of the repair being reported. Some jobs require a pre-inspection to establish what work is needed. The staff member completing the inspection will advise what work is required and the landlord will contact the resident by phone to book an appointment.
The landlord’s responsive repair policy states that in some instances a follow on appointment may be needed, this may be due to another trade being required (e.g. electrician or heating engineer), parts or non-stock materials being required, or more time needed. The tradesperson will ensure that the repair is left safe and tidy and will notify the Customer Support and Planning Team of the additional work and a new appointment will be made to advise customers when the work will be completed. The tradesperson will advise the tenant of the reason that follow-on work is required; what work is left to be completed and a likely return date.
On 21 March 2023, the resident reported that her window could not be opened as it had been sealed shut by paint. The landlord advised that it had raised this repair to a contractor in error.
On 27 March 2023, the landlord’s record shows that it had re-raised the repair for the window and attended on 30 March 2023. On this visit, it identified that replacement window handles were required and ordered them through its supplier.
On 18 April 2023, the landlord raised further works and attended on 4 May 2023, 30 working days after the resident initially raised the repair with the landlord and 10 days outside of its repair policy timeframe. At this appointment the landlord carried out work to free up all the windows and fitted new handles to the windows.
On 11 May 2023, the landlord’s record shows it raised a repair to the bedroom window. The landlord’s record shows the repair was marked as completed on 12 June 2023, 22 working days after the resident raised the repair with the landlord.
On the same day, 11 May 2023, the resident also reported an issue with the secondary glazing in the living room. The landlord’s contractors attended on 22 May 2023 and ordered new secondary glazing. The landlord’s records show it completed works to the window on 27 June 2023, 33 working days later and 13 working days outside of the landlords timeframe for routine repairs.
This Service understands that repairs can be delayed due to additional works being needed or the need to order further materials, however in this instance the landlord has failed to evidence why it took so long to complete each repair or that it advised the resident of the reason for the delay which will have likely caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
An Occupational Therapist assessment on 6 July 2023 confirmed the resident was not able to use the windows but concluded that the matter should first be addressed as a general repairs issue. The report advised that the landlord had been informed, and the referral would be closed.
Given the outcome of the OT referral, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to raise a repair or an inspection of the windows, however there is no evidence that the landlord contacted the resident to acknowledge receipt of the report or consider what action it should take to resolve the concerns raised in the OT report, which is a failing.
The landlord acknowledged issues with the windows in its email to the residents MP on 5 September 2023, in which it explained that the windows in the resident’s block could be difficult to open particularly for older residents. The landlord stated that repairs would be carried out as needed to keep the windows functional but did not provide a plan of action to resolve the window issues in the long term.
The landlord’s stage 2 response recognised the problems with the windows but failed to provide a practical or reasonable solution. It’s suggestion that the resident should contact the landlord every time she wished to open a window was not a long-term solution to the problem and would likely have been unfeasible for the landlord to honour this commitment in the long term. The landlord’s response also failed to acknowledge that the resident should be able to control the ventilation in her home herself.
The landlords suggested resolution further indicates a lack of consideration for the resident’s disability. Given the known vulnerability of the resident, the landlord would be expected under the Equality Act 2010 to demonstrate it had taken steps to ensure that it understood the needs of the resident. It would also have been expected to demonstrate it had responded to those needs in the way it provided its services and communicated with her. That the landlords suggested resolution to the resident’s inability to be able to open her windows was for her to call the landlord each time she wished to open or close a window demonstrates a failure on the part of the landlord to ensure it has fully considered the residents needs.
Based upon the evidence seen, the landlord consistently failed to attend repairs raised by the resident within its repair policy timescales and the use of these appointments proved ineffective to resolve the window problems in the longer term. Further the landlords suggested solution did not to take into account the residents right to be able to control the ventilation within her home. The landlord also failed to demonstrate that it had considered any duties it may have towards the resident under the Equality Act 2010. This represents maladministration and an order for £350 compensation for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident has been ordered. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where failures have adversely affected the resident but caused no permanent impact.

The associated complaint

The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints policy. At stage 1, it must issue a formal response within 20 working days of receiving a complaint. At stage 2, it must issue a final response within 30 working days of receiving a complaint escalation. If delays occur, the landlord must inform the resident as soon as possible.
On 21 June 2023, the resident’s MP contacted the landlord about concerns with a window. The landlord confirmed to this Service that it treated this contact as a formal complaint.
On 21 June 2023, the landlord replied to the MP, confirming an appointment for 27 June 2023 and promising an update afterwards. The landlord did not provide this information to the resident. This response was not compliant with section 6.2 of the Code which says that complaints must be acknowledged, defined and logged at stage 1 of the complaint’s procedure within 5 working days of the complaint being received.
The landlord’s response to the MP was also not compliant with its own policy or section 6.9 of the Code which states landlords must confirm the following in writing to the resident at the completion of stage 1 in clear, plain language:
1. The complaint stage.
2. The complaint definition.
3. The decision on the complaint.
4. The reasons for any decisions made.
5. The details of any remedy offered to put things right.
6. Details of any outstanding actions.
7. Details of how to escalate the matter to stage 2 if the individual is not satisfied with the response.
On 7 August 2023, the landlord updated the MP again. It explained how it managed window repairs, outlined conservation area restrictions on replacements, and described the capital team’s role. Although relevant, once again, the landlord did not send this information to the resident.
The landlord provided further updates to the MP on 7 August and 5 September 2023, which served to further prolong the complaints process and denied the resident the option of requesting to escalate the complaint.
The resident contacted her landlord on 8 September 2023 and requested an escalation of her complaint, which the landlord acknowledged on 11 September 2023. The resident has informed the Service that her landlord had asked her to wait 20 days for the stage 2 response and that on 17 October 2023 she contacted the landlord again asking for a response to her escalation request. Whilst this Service does not doubt the resident’s account, in this instance there is no independent evidence to corroborate this version of events. It has therefore, not been possible for this investigation to make a determination on this point.
On 24 November 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. In its response it apologised for the delay in responding at stage 2 and acknowledged the difficulties the windows posed to the resident but did not commit to a long term solution. It also failed to acknowledge, apologise for or demonstrate learning from its failings at stage 1 of the complaints process. The landlord did not consider compensation at either stage of the complaints process.
The stage 2 response recommended that within 1 month of the stage 2 response the resident should be provided with written contact details for out of hours support for help with opening her windows and confirmation of whether the landlord would consider replacement windows in its future budget planning. The landlord has not provided evidence that it has followed this up recommendation.
The complaint handling failures identified during this investigation represent maladministration and the landlord has been ordered to pay the resident £150. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where failures have adversely affected the resident but caused no permanent impact.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s windows.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is to write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified within this report.
Within 4 weeks the landlord is to pay the resident £500. This is broken down as:
1. £350 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failures in its handling of the repairs to the resident’s windows.
2. £150 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the handling of the associated complaint.
3. It is the Ombudsman’s position that compensation awarded by this Service should be treated separately from any existing financial arrangements between the landlord and resident and should not be offset against arrears. This applies regardless of what is stated in the landlord’s compensation policy.
Within 4 weeks the landlord must contact the resident to ascertain whether issues with the windows are still ongoing. If so arrange to inspect the windows and produce a timebound action plan detailing what the issues are and how the landlord intends to resolve them. A copy of the report should be shared with both the resident and this Service.
Within 4 weeks the landlord must confirm to the resident and this Service the contact details for the resident to access out of hours support for her windows and whether it has considered replacing the windows in its future budget planning.
The landlord should provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendation

On 8 February 2024, the Ombudsman issued the statutory Complaint Handling Code. This Code sets out the requirements landlords must meet when handling complaints in both policy and practice. The statutory Code applies from 1 April 2024. The Ombudsman has a duty to monitor compliance with the Code. We will assess landlords using our Compliance Framework and take action where there is evidence that the requirements set out in the Code are not being met. In this investigation, we found failures in complaint handling. It is therefore recommended that the landlord to consider the findings highlighted in this investigation when reviewing its policies and practices against the statutory Code.