Birmingham City Council (202408451)

Decision
Case ID	202408451
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Birmingham City Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

The resident signed the tenancy agreement in December 2022 and moved into the property in January 2023. After she moved in, the resident raised concerns about the condition of the property and reported repairs. The landlord completed some repairs and said the property met its ‘empty property standard’.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Response to concerns about the condition of the property and the handling of repairs.
2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

There was maladministration in the landlord’s:
1. Response to concerns about the condition of the property and the handling of repairs.
2. Complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to concerns about the condition of the property and the handling of repairs

The landlord’s repair records were incomplete. The landlord did not respond to all the issues the resident reported. It said some repairs were the responsibility of its ‘voids team’ but failed to say if it would fix the other issues. The landlord said there was no service failure but later acknowledged delays and awarded compensation. It did not explain why it changed its position.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord did not address all the issues the resident raised. It took too long to send its stage 1 and stage 2 response. The landlord acknowledged complaint handling failings and said it would award compensation but took 9 months to do so.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 07 January 2026
2	Compensation order If it has not done so already, the landlord must pay £1325. This is the compensation it awarded to the resident in July 2025 for repair and complaint handling failures. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of the payment.	No later than 07 January 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must arrange an inspection of the property. It must take reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure: The house and garden are inspected. It must provide a written inspection report with photos. The survey must set out: Whether there are any outstanding repairs. Whether there are any holes or points of entry for vermin. Whether there is any rubbish, rubble or other outstanding works in the garden. Whether the landlord is responsible for repairing or resolving any issues, together with any reasons where it is not. A full scope of works to achieve lasting and effective repairs (for issues for which the landlord is responsible). The likely timescales to commence and complete works.	No later than 07 January 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord should consider reimbursing the resident for the money she spent on plastering.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
9 March 2023	The resident complained about the condition of the property when she moved in and the landlord’s handling of repairs. The resident said the kitchen was poorly fitted and there was no space for the washing machine. She said the bathroom walls were crumbling. The resident said there were big holes through which vermin could enter.
31 May 2023	The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint. The landlord said it inspected on 16 May 2023. It said it fixed the back door, washing machine, bath trim and door handle. The landlord said the resident also complained about draughts, old skirting, door and frames, old plaster and hairline cracks. It said these all met its ‘empty property standards’ and it had a ‘repair, not renew’ policy.
27 June 2023	The resident said she escalated her complaint.
19 March 2024	The resident sent information to the landlord. She said it requested this when she escalated her complaint and apologised for the delay. The resident told the landlord she reported repairs after she moved in and asked for a re-inspection. She said some repairs were completed but the issues could not be ‘patched-up’. The resident questioned how the property was approved for letting. She said she asked for the ‘voids schedule of works’ but the landlord had not sent it. The resident said the kitchen was poorly fitted, cold and draughty. She said woodlice came through the gaps between the cupboards, the cooker location was unsafe, and the washing machine did not fit. The resident said the walls were cracked and ‘bubbled’, and architraves and skirting old and broken. She said the bathroom was also poorly fitted and freezing. The resident said the sink was loose, there was polystyrene in the walls and large, old pipes that meant she could not decorate. She said the backdoor was dirty and draughty, new windows were poorly fitted and window locks missing. The resident said the staircase was broken and splintered. She said sections of the roof were missing and there was rubble and rubbish in the garden. The resident said she could not afford to fix any more walls and asked to be reimbursed £950 for plastering costs. She said the condition of the property meant her energy bills were very high. The resident asked if the property would be included in any planned works. She said the property condition and cold stopped her caring for her grandson who had a heart condition.
28 June 2024	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request, which it said it received on 18 June 2024.
5 July 2024	The landlord said it would not escalate the complaint as it was too long since stage 1. It said the complaint outcome would remain the same.
31 July 2024	The landlord confirmed the resident’s complaint should be escalated.
1 October 2024	The landlord sent its stage 2 response. It apologised for the handling of the resident’s escalation request, which it said it initially logged as a new complaint. The landlord said it had fixed the back door, washing machine, bath trim and door handle. It said the other issues did not breach the landlord’s ‘empty property standards’. The landlord said it had done a damp and mould treatment, plastered the bathroom, installed insulation in the bathroom, filled holes to prevent vermin, fixed a toilet leak and repaired the stairs. The landlord partially upheld the resident’s complaint. It said there was no service failure in its repair handling, but it had made complaint handling mistakes. The landlord said it was assessing compensation for complaint handling.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to us in October 2024 because she was unhappy with the condition of the property and handling of repairs. She said she wanted the landlord to fix the issues.
July 2025	The landlord revised its compensation offer to £1325. This comprised £350 for complaint handling failings and £975 for repair delays and the inconvenience these caused the resident.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s response to concerns about condition of the property and the handling of repairs
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord replaced the kitchen and bathroom before the resident moved in. It has not provided records of these works. The landlord did a ‘void repair check’ on 9 December 2022 and recorded no repairs. The resident said she viewed the house shortly after. She said the landlord did not attend the viewing. The resident signed the tenancy on 26 December 2022. She said she was unable to move in because window repairs were needed. On 20 December 2022 the landlord ordered repairs to the floors, stairs, walls, ceilings, kitchen fittings and damp and mould. The landlord’s repair and customer contact records are incomplete. It has not provided a clear and comprehensive record of the condition of the property when it was let. Complete and accurate repair records are essential to allow a landlord to fulfil its repair obligations and to evidence it has done so. This is a record keeping failure.
The landlord inspected on 16 May 2023. The landlord acted correctly in arranging an inspection, however, it did not document the results. It repaired the bath seal, refitted the sink, adjusted the backdoor, replaced the door handle and made space for the washing machine. The landlord said it did not record the repairs as they were carried out by the voids team. This is a record keeping failure.
In its stage 1 response, the landlord said draughts, old skirting, doors, frames, plaster and cracks met its ‘empty property repair standard’. The landlord said its policy was to ‘repair and not renew’ but it failed to say if it would order repairs.
Its response did not address the damp and mould, leaking toilet or the installation of the kitchen and bathroom. The resident had reported these issues, however there is no evidence the landlord inspected or fixed these.
In May 2023 the landlord ordered a gully clearance, brickwork repairs and the clearance of rubble and rubbish from the garden. There is no evidence these were completed.
In March 2024 the resident sent information on the property condition and repairs. The resident said most repairs had not been fixed and any work done was poor quality. She said the property condition meant her energy bills were high. She asked to be reimbursed £950 for plastering costs and asked to receive details of the works done before she moved in. The resident later sent photos of the property.
There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident or raised any repairs. The resident had reported multiple internal and external issues. The resident had reported multiple internal and external issues, but the landlord did not arrange an inspection.
In its stage 2 response the landlord restated the information sent at stage 1. It said there was no service failure as it had completed the reported repairs. It did not say how long it took to complete the repairs. The landlord did not complete the repairs within the 30-day timeframe in its repairs policy,
In July 2025 the landlord apologised for the repair delays and awarded £995 compensation.
The resident disagreed with the landlord’s account of the repairs. She said the landlord did kitchen repairs in August 2025 but there were still issues with the bathroom pipes and walls. The resident said there were still holes where draughts, water and insects could enter. She said the landlord had not removed all the rubble and rubbish and it was not safe for her grandchildren to use the garden. She said the property was still freezing. The resident said she wanted the landlord to fix the remaining issues.
Where the landlord admitted failings, we consider whether the redress it offered put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. We consider whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord acknowledged its repair delays. It did this outside of its internal complaints process and there is no evidence it investigated the failings. This suggests the landlord did not learn from the repair failings. On that basis we have found there was maladministration.
The landlord’s compensation award falls within the range in our remedies guidance for failures, which had a significant impact on the resident. We have therefore not awarded further compensation. We have ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident for the failings set out above and made orders to fix these issues.

Complaint	The landlord’s complaint handling
Finding	Maladministration

Our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets the timeframes for the landlord to acknowledge a complaint and send a response at stage 1 and stage 2.
On 9 March 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. There is no evidence the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 31 May 2023. This was 45 working days after the response time required by the Code.
The landlord did not address all the issues in the resident’s complaint. It failed to respond to the resident’s concern that vermin were able to enter the property because of holes in the brickwork. This was not in keeping with the Code.
The resident said she escalated her complaint on 27 June 2023. The landlord said it had no record of the escalation request.
On 19 March 2024 the resident sent details of the property condition and outstanding repairs. She said the landlord asked for this information when she escalated her complaint.
On 28 June 2024 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request. On 5 July 2024 it said it would not escalate the complaint, and on 31 July 2024 it said the complaint should be escalated. The landlord took too long to confirm how it would handle the complaint. This delayed the resident’s access to a complaint resolution.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 1 October 2024. This was 15 months after the resident said she escalated her complaint and over 6 months after she provided additional information.
The landlord did not address all the issues the resident raised. It failed to respond to the resident’s request to be reimbursed for plastering costs.
The landlord acknowledged delays in handling the resident’s complaint. It said it would compensate the resident but would calculate the award. The landlord should have included the compensation award in its stage 2 response.
In July 2025 the landlord awarded £350 compensation. This was 9 months after it sent its stage 2 response. It did not explain the delay in awarding the compensation.
The landlord’s compensation award falls within range in our remedies guidance where there was a failing that adversely affected the resident. We have therefore not awarded further compensation. We have ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident for the failings set out above.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord has not provided complete repair records. This was a record keeping failure.

Communication

The landlord did not engage effectively with the resident’s concerns about voids work and repairs.