Dacorum Borough Council (202420784)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202420784

Dacorum Borough Council

30 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The installation of a new kitchen and bathroom at the resident’s property and associated remedial repairs.
    2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has a secure tenancy with the landlord, a council. The property is a two-bedroom house in which the resident lives with her two children.
  2. On 16 March 2023, the resident complained that a kitchen and bathroom refit delayed from 2018 and scheduled for 10 March 2023, did not go ahead. This was because an asbestos report was not complete. She said she had prepared both rooms for this and was now living out of boxes.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 3 April 2023. It apologised that its subcontractor had not given prior notice that it cancelled the refit. It obtained the asbestos report on 16 March but put all kitchen and bathroom refits on hold due to issues with subcontractors. It said once the refit was due to begin in the new financial year, the subcontractor would inform her with notice.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint on 17 July 2023. She complained that the kitchen and bathroom refit had begun, but she was concerned about the quality of the work. She said water had been left dripping through her kitchen ceiling and several appointments were required to rectify issues, with some unresolved. She also said the subcontractor left dangerous items out in reach of her children.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 18 December 2023. It upheld her complaint, acknowledging the workmanship was of poor quality and dangerous. It believed the majority of the work was complete but it would regrout the kitchen and complete an agreed-upon snag list. It apologised and offered £1250 compensation, made up of a 20% discount on rent and compensation for the inconvenience caused.
  6. The resident brought her complaint to the Ombudsman because she felt the landlord’s compensation was insufficient. She said the landlord had not completed all work despite it promising it would.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In correspondence with the Ombudsman, the resident raised several issues that occurred after the landlord’s final complaint response of 18 December 2023. This included leaks from the bathroom to the kitchen, including damage to the kitchen ceiling and decoration. The resident complained about this on 7 February 2024, and the landlord provided its stage 1 response on 5 March. The resident did not escalate this complaint, later telling the Ombudsman she did not do so because her complaint was with the Service at the time.
  2. However, while these further issues may be related to the resident’s original complaint, they are for a different period. The landlord needs to provide a final complaint response to these issues before the Ombudsman can potentially investigate. Once she has exhausted the landlord’s complaints process, she can contact the Ombudsman. These points will not be assessed in this report.
  3. The resident has also told the Ombudsman about the impact on her health. The Ombudsman is unable to assess the cause of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by the landlord’s actions or inaction. This is a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. As this issue is more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts it will not be considered in this report.

Installation of a new kitchen and bathroom at the property and associated remedial repairs.

  1. In her complaint escalation of 17 July 2023, the resident said there were several issues following the kitchen and bathroom refit that began on 19 June. This included:
    1. Dangerous blades and tools left out, in reach of the resident’s children.
    2. Work completed was of poor quality and needed to be redone several times, including visits from many operatives. Water was left dripping through the light on several occasions.
    3. She said these issues had caused stress, upheaval and upset to her and her family. She said they had expenses for petrol, food and washing due to not being able to use the kitchen and bathroom for an extended period.
  2. The landlord upheld all the resident’s concerns in its 18 December 2023 stage 2 reply. It decided this following a visit to the property in which it identified what it called “poor quality and dangerous workmanship.”  The landlord offered compensation made up of a 20% discount in rent between the work starting on 19 June 2023 and its estimated completion in January 2024. This came to £901.62, which it rounded to £1000. It also offered £250 for inconvenience. Its total compensation offer was £1250.
  3. This offer was in line with its highest tier of discretionary compensation in its compensation policy. This recognises serious failings which have had a seriously detrimental impact on the resident. The compensation offered was therefore proportionate and was also in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for the inconvenience, stress, and upheaval caused to the resident.
  4. The landlord did not specifically respond to the resident’s concerns about damage to her vacuum cleaner in its complaint responses. There is no evidence it factored this into its compensation offer. Its compensation policy states that reimbursement for damaged items is dealt with by its insurance team. The landlord should have directed the resident to this team to initiate an insurance claim. Nonetheless there is no evidence of prolonged impact and the landlord’s compensation order was appropriate.
  5. In its 18 December 2023 stage 2 response, the landlord confirmed it would complete all outstanding work at the property. This included a “snag list” it had agreed with the resident and regrouting of her tiles. Evidence shows the landlord arranged for a new subcontractor to complete the snagging work, and it was completed on 10 January 2024. The subcontractors notes at the time stated the resident said she was very happy with the finished product.  This work was completed within 25 calendar days as the landlord’s repair policy suggests.
  6. In summary, the landlord acknowledged its failings in its complaint responses. It apologised for the delay in completing the refit and explained why this was. It recognised the quality and safety of the refit work once started, was not sufficient. It apologised for this and offered appropriate and proportionate compensation for the time the resident was affected. It agreed to complete an outstanding snag list of work, which it did within an appropriate period. Its responses to the complaint and the compensation and other remedies it offered for its failings were proportionate and reasonable.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy confirms a resident has 28 days upon receiving their stage 1 response to escalate their complaint. It will appoint an impartial staff member to investigate an escalated complaint and provide its stage 2 response within 20 working days. Where it needs extra time to respond, it will agree on a new date with the complainant.
  2. The resident escalated her complaint on 17 July 2023. This exceeded the 28-day timescale to escalate the landlord’s 3 April stage 1 response. However, the landlord appropriately used its discretion to allow the resident’s escalation.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 18 December 2023. It took 110 working days to provide its response, exceeding the timescale in its policy by 90 working days. There is no evidence of the landlord contacting the resident to discuss a new date for response, as its policy suggests. It did not acknowledge this delay or apologise for this in its complaint response.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its handling of the installation of a new kitchen and bathroom at the property and associated remedial repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. In light of the complaint handling failings found in this report, the landlord must pay the resident £100 within 4 weeks of this report.
  2. Evidence of compliance with these orders must be provided by their respective deadlines.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not done so, the landlord should now pay the resident the £1200 it offered in its complaint responses. The findings in this report are partly based on it doing so.