Places for People Group Limited (202331688)

Background

1. The property is a one-bedroom, ground floor flat. The issues raised in this complaint originate from the bathroom and the adjoining cloakroom, which contains a toilet and airing cupboard.

What the complaint is about

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

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Reports of repairs.
   2. Associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord did not proactively progress and manage repairs or deal with them in line with its repair policy.
5. The landlord did not deal with the complaints in line with its complaint policy or our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).

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.

6. The landlord’s repair policy says it aims to deal with appointable repairs (non-emergency) within 28 days. We have not seen evidence of a damp and mould report of November 2021. However, the landlord accepted it failed to carry out remedial work following this. It also failed to act on the later report of mould and leaking toilet pipes in December 2022. It told us it referred the repair to a contractor but no work was arranged at that time. Therefore, the landlord failed to deal with the resident’s reports of mould and leaking toilet pipes within its 28-day target.
7. The landlord did not book work to replace the cylinder until 31 July 2023, after the resident chased it. Again, this was outside of the 28-day target that the landlord aims to complete repairs. The landlord replaced the cylinder in September 2023 (as the resident requested a new appointment).
8. Once the landlord was put on notice that the cylinder storage cupboard was rotten due to the leak it should have acted. There is no evidence it did. While its stage 1 response said it scheduled work for 28 March 2024, this issue was not on the proposed list of work. This was another failure which, when combined with others, amounts to maladministration.
9. It is positive the landlord addressed the resident’s report of 5 June 2023 (about the faulty bathroom light) as an emergency repair. It attended within 24 hours and found the electrics to be satisfactory. We have not seen that the landlord attended the second report of 29 July 2023 within the 24-hour emergency repair target. While it told us a contractor attended and quoted for various work, this was not progressed. This was a further failure that compounded the detriment to the resident. He told us this restricted his use of the bathroom.
10. The landlord arranged bathroom ceiling repairs for 10 August 2023. This was appropriate and within the timeframe that it aimed to deal with such repairs. However, the resident asked for the appointment to be rearranged. While the landlord inspected the issue on 7 September 2023, and booked follow up work for 2 October 2023, it could not access the property. This is despite records showing the resident was aware of the appointment.
11. The landlord did not book a further appointment at that time. This was reasonable. Its repair policy says residents must contact it to arrange another appointment if it cannot gain access. It says the repair will be cancelled if no contact is made. We have not seen the resident progressed the repair at that time. Further, a condition of the tenancy agreement is that the resident allows the landlord to carry out inspections or repairs. The resident should have allowed access or re-arranged the appointment if it was inconvenient.
12. However, the landlord’s repair policy also says it will monitor no access visits to ensure properties do not fall into disrepair. We have not seen that this happened in this case. We would expect the landlord to monitor the situation, given the resident’s report that the ceiling may collapse. Further, the landlord arranged to inspect the potential leak at the above property on 8 September 2023 but could not gain access. Again, there is no record this was progressed or monitored in line with the repair policy. The landlord should have been more proactive identifying and repairing any leaks that affected the property.
13. The resident reported his pipes had been leaking for a long time on 22 December 2023. The landlord booked repairs for 5 January 2024, in line with its repair timeframes, but could not gain access. A second attempt of 12 January 2024 also failed. We do not know if the resident agreed to either appointment but he was aware of the latter.
14. The landlord attended on 24 January 2024 though it is unclear what work was done other than identifying that mould needed to be investigated and treated. It also identified the bathroom ceiling needed repair and it plastered it on 8 February 2024. The landlord re-scheduled a follow-up appointment of 14 March 2024 as the contractor could not attend. The subsequent appointment of 28 March 2024 did not go ahead as the resident had left for work. We do not know if he agreed to this appointment. The repairs remained incomplete and there is no evidence the landlord monitored them.
15. It is positive the landlord acknowledged some failures in its stage 1 response. An email from the contractor suggests the subsequent survey took place on 16 May 2024 and they submitted a quote for plumbing, ventilation, joinery and ceiling repairs. However, there is no record the quote was approved or followed up.
16. Following the resident’s request to escalate his complaint, it is positive the landlord arranged an inspection on 19 July 2024 to identify all outstanding work. Internal emails say that the inspector identified the following:
    1. Mould on the bathroom wall.
    2. Numerous leaks from properties above causing damage to the bathroom ceiling and mould. They said there was a visible crack where water was leaking through.
    3. Mould in the cylinder storage cupboard.
    4. Leaking toilet.
    5. Water damaged light in the bathroom.
    6. Ventilation improvements were needed.
17. The inspector noted the bathroom light was changed on the day he visited. However, the resident reported further issues with it that the landlord dealt with appropriately. We understand the bathroom light would continue to be affected, while the leak from above remained untraced and unresolved.
18. The landlord notified the resident of a further appointment of 21 August 2024 by voice mail. However, records do not show when it left the message or how much notice the resident had of the appointment. Again, the landlord could not access the property. It booked another appointment for 5 September 2024 when an operative noted some work could not be completed until the leak had been inspected.
19. The landlord’s stage 2 response did not explain how its failures had contributed to repair delays. It also placed a large emphasis on the resident not providing access and that this contributed to the delay. There is evidence that the resident contributed to some repair delays by not allowing access. However, it is not always clear if he agreed to appointments in line with the repair policy. Further, he had allowed access for a significant number of repairs by that point, most of which did not resolve the issue.
20. That being said, it is positive the landlord acknowledged significant repair delays and poor communication and awarded £650 for these overall. This was appropriate and in line with its compensation policy for when there has been maladministration with a significant and serious long-term effect on a resident including physical or emotional impact. It is positive that the landlord recognised the distress and inconvenience caused while the resident lived with the issues over a prolonged and unnecessary period.
21. The landlord did not reimburse the resident’s wages. It cited our remedies guidance and that we would not usually compensate a resident for taking time off for repairs. However, it did not explain our guidance also says there may be times when we do order compensation if landlords miss repair appointments or fail to resolve the issue. Nevertheless, we are satisfied the landlord’s compensation reflected the significant time and trouble and inconvenience caused to the resident at that point.
22. The landlord told us it installed a new toilet on 22 October 2024. This was 2 years after the resident reported leaking toilet pipes and this was, again, significantly outside its repair timeframe. However, the landlord could not complete the remaining work until it resolved the untraced leak. There is no record of any appointment to inspect the above property until 4 November 2024. This was cancelled as the inspector had to attend an emergency job. It was rearranged to 10 December 2024 but the landlord could not gain access. While this was out of the landlord’s control, it was aware of the potential issue more than a year earlier. If it had been more proactive in monitoring the failed visit at the property above it could have completed the outstanding repairs at the property sooner.
23. The landlord carried out a temporary fix to stop the leak at the above property in January 2025. Follow up work was completed in March 2025. This meant the landlord could now repair the remaining issues at the property. While it completed some work by 25 April 2025, it told us decorative bathroom work and repairs to the cylinder storage cupboard were still outstanding as of 11 November 2025. It said they are booked for 24 November 2025. This is more than 2 years since the resident reported repairs. It is significantly outside the 28-day target that the landlord aims to carry out such repairs.
24. The landlord has not acknowledged the further failures. Therefore, it has missed an opportunity to put things right in line with our dispute resolution principles. We order it to apologise for the failings identified in this report and pay the resident £850 compensation (inclusive of the £650 previously awarded). This is in line with our remedies guidance when there has been a failure that had a significant impact on the resident and needs substantial redress to put things right.
25. We also order the landlord to agree a mutually convenient time with the resident to identify any outstanding repairs and provide a schedule of work, including completion timescales.

26. The landlord defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction about its standard of service, actions, or lack of action. As of August 2023, the landlord had a 2-stage complaint policy. However, it also aimed to resolve stage 1 complaints by putting things right within 24 hours. Should it be unable to do so, it should acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days and provide a response within 10 working days.
27. There is no evidence the landlord issued a response to the resident’s stage 1 complaint initially. It told us this was because it had resolved the issues. However, there is no evidence of this or that it did so within 24 hours. While the landlord booked a survey a few days later, we know repairs remained outstanding. We would have expected the landlord to confirm the resident was happy that it had addressed his complaints before deciding not to progress them. We have not seen a record that it did.
28. This meant there were further delays resolving the substantive repair issues. The resident had to spend time and trouble seeking our help to progress his complaint. This resulted in the landlord reopening his complaint on 19 April 2024 and acknowledging it on 24 April 2024. The stage 1 response was issued 182 working days later than it should have been. The landlord also did not address the resident’s complaint about the damaged ceiling light. These failures amount to maladministration.
29. The landlord’s complaint policy says it aims to acknowledge stage 2 complaints in 5 working days and then issue a response 20 working days later. The landlord did not acknowledge the escalated complaint until 23 June 2024, 14 working days later than it should have. The stage 2 response was then issued 78 days late and outside the timeframes set out in the landlord’s complaint policy and our Code. There is evidence it was trying to obtain the status of repairs and seeking to progress them. However, there is no record it kept the resident regularly informed. This is likely to have compounded the detriment and caused frustration.
30. The landlord did not acknowledge all its complaint handling failures in the stage 2 response. Therefore, it missed another opportunity to put things right. We order it to apologise for the complaint handling failures and pay the resident £150. This is in line with our remedies guidance when there has been maladministration that adversely affected the resident, albeit with no permanent impact.

Learning

31. The landlord has a good practice of arranging an inspection on receipt of a stage 2 complaint. This is an effective way of identifying the extent of any outstanding work and what it needs to do to address it. This would help inform the stage 2 response and enable the landlord to resolve issues as part of it.

Knowledge information management (record keeping) and Communication

32. Records do not show if the landlord applied its policy of agreeing appointments with the resident. The landlord may reduce failed access visits and complete repairs sooner, if it follows this policy.
33. Repair records did not always show what work the landlord had carried out when follow up work was required, or that it regularly updated the resident of its plans to address outstanding repairs. Our spotlight report on Repairing Trust explains landlords can avoid failures when they let residents know what to expect regarding repairs and provide a clear schedule for repair visits. The landlord could have avoided frustration and dissatisfaction if it followed these recommendations.