Waverley Borough Council (202526088)

Background

1. The resident lives with her husband and 2 children. Her eldest son has health issues, including a visual impairment. She complained to the landlord about repairs when she moved in, and also about outstanding repairs. She asked us to investigate as she was not satisfied with the landlord’s final response to her complaint.

What the complaint is about

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

Our decision (determination)

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

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

Summary of reasons

The resident’s reports of repairs at the property.

4. The landlord acknowledged it was delayed in completing all repairs at the property. It offered compensation, but this was not proportionate to the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident and her family.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord failed to comply with its complaints policy.

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 have not investigated

6. On 8 December 2025 and 30 January 2026, the resident told us about several new issues including, the conduct of the landlord’s staff and contractors, the boiler, damp and mould, access to the bathroom during repairs and no heating and hot water. As these issues did not form part of the original complaint, they will not be included in this investigation. The resident has told us she has raised a new complaint to the landlord. We will not assess these points in this report.
7. The resident said she has raised a further complaint with the landlord but it is unclear if all issues stated are included. The resident has the opportunity to raise them with the landlord and once she has exhausted its complaints procedure she can raise them with us. We will not assess these points in this report.
8. The resident also told us that the issues with the repairs has affected her health. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

What we have investigated

9. The resident complained that there were many repair issues she raised when she signed up for the property (on 8 January 2025) before moving in on 13 January. In its complaint responses, the landlord said it had no evidence on the condition of the property when the resident moved in following repair works during the void period. It acknowledged this was a failing, apologised and agreed it would learn from this to improve its service. There is no evidence of repair reports from the resident between 13 January and 7 April 2025.
10. The landlord confirmed that it agreed to repair the fences when the resident moved in. It confirmed its contractor repaired the fences on 19 May 2025. It took 126 days (13 January to 19 May 2025) to complete the repairs. This was not appropriate as it exceeds the landlord’s repairs policy timescale of completing a routine repair in 28 days.
11. In the resident’s 8 April 2025 complaint, she said there were other outstanding repair issues. These were in both gardens, the outhouse, both bathrooms and the kitchen. It included issues with most doors, windows, and electrical sockets. The landlord confirmed it would inspect all repair issues. This was an appropriate response as there is no evidence that it was previously aware of these outstanding issues. It was delayed in arranging the inspection, however, due to a 1-month delay in acknowledging the resident’s complaint.
12. Following this, the landlord failed to act in accordance with its repairs policy of completing repairs within 28 days. It confirmed the following in its stage 2 response:
    1. It inspected the property on 23 May 2025 and raised repairs with its contractor the same day in line with the initial repair issues raised by the resident. It appropriately completed a post inspection on 22 July, but found all work was either completed incorrectly or not at all.
    2. It re-raised the repairs on 22 July 2025 and appropriately completed a post inspection on 18 August. However, it found the repairs to the outhouse, both gardens and both bathrooms were still outstanding.
13. The landlord confirmed in its stage 2 response that it re-raised the outstanding repairs on 18 August 2025 and promised to complete all repairs by the end of September 2025. This included replacing the resident’s upstairs bathroom, which was reasonable as it confirmed it was not due for renewal at the time. The landlord did not complete the repairs or bathroom replacement by the end of September 2025 timescales as promised.
14. However, the landlord wrote to the resident on 3 October 2025 to update her on some of the repairs. It confirmed it would replace the downstairs bathroom and had raised this. As with the upstairs bathroom, this was a reasonable approach. It also confirmed it was trying to find a solution to repair the outhouse floor. Following this, it completed the repairs to the upstairs bathroom on 5 November, the kitchen on 17 November, the gardens on 19 November, and the downstairs toilet on 25 November. It is unclear when the outhouse repair was completed, but evidence suggests 16 November.
15. The repairs took over 8 months to be fully completed. This far exceeded the 28 days in the landlord’s repair policy and its promise in its stage 2 response to complete all by the end of September 2025.
16. The landlord’s compensation policy confirms it offers compensation in line with our remedies guidance. In its stage 2 response, it offered £250 compensation for the distress the delays caused to the resident and her family between May and September 2025. The amount offered was not proportionate to the delays or disruption caused to the resident or her family. The landlord offered no compensation for the further delays in completing the repairs from the end of September to November 2025.
17. In summary we have found maladministration. The landlord recognised it was delayed in completing the repairs and offered compensation, but this was not proportionate to the total inconvenience and distress caused to the resident. This was due to the prolonged delays and ongoing attempts to complete work and subsequent inspections. The landlord was reasonable in agreeing to renew both of the residents’ bathrooms, despite not being obliged to at the time.
18. We have ordered the landlord to apologise, pay compensation of £250 and review the complaint, in particular considering its communication with its contractor.

19. The landlord’s complaints policy confirms that at stage 1, it will acknowledge complaints within 3 working days and reply within 10 working days. The landlord took 20 working days to acknowledge the complaint and 29 working days to respond to the complaint. This was not appropriate and not in line with its complaints policy or our Complaint Handling Code. The landlord also inaccurately stated the resident made her complaint on 8 May. It did not acknowledge or address any of these failings in this or its later stage 2 response.
20. The resident escalated her complaint on 19 August 2025. There is no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the escalation request, as its complaint policy states it should. It provided its stage 2 response on 28 August, which was within the 20 working days its complaints policy allows.
21. In summary we have found service failure as the landlord failed to act in accordance with its complaints policy in its handling of the stage 1 and stage 2 complaints. We have ordered it to pay £100 compensation.

Learning

22. Landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord’s complaint process lacked customer focus and took too long.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. The landlord maintained appropriate records that supported our investigation into the complaint, which helped us understand events that had taken place.

Communication

24. Overall, the landlord’s communication with the resident was poor. On occasion it failed to respond to or update the resident. More informative communication could have reassured the resident that it was taking his concerns seriously. It could consider our Attitudes, Respect and Rights spotlight report for more effective service delivery.