Places for People Group Limited (202503630)

Background

1. The resident complained to the landlord on 3 November 2024 about changes to scheme parking rules where he lives. He said he was unhappy because the new parking rules affected visitors to his home.Hemade another complaint to the landlord on12 November 2024 because it did not tell him it had cancelled arepair appointment.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Parking enforcement.
   2. Window repairs.
   3. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was reasonable redress which satisfactorily resolved the complaint about:
   1. Parking enforcement.
   2. Window repairs.
   3. The resident’s complaint.

Reasons

The landlord’s handling of parking enforcement

4. The resident’s tenancy agreement does not provide a right to a parking space, and the landlord’s estate management policy states that parking spaces are not guaranteed. It also states that communal parking arrangements are scheme specific and managed locally.
5. As part of his complaint, the resident raised concerns that the landlord discriminated against him in failing to provide him with a parking space because he did not own a car. Under the Equality Act 2010, landlords must consider residents’ protected characteristics, such as age, gender, and race. We can assess whether the landlord showed it considered this. However, the resident did not specify which protected characteristic he believed was overlooked. This means the landlord has not had the opportunity to respond to that specific concern.
6. In its complaint responses, the landlord explained that the new parking rules were introduced to safeguard residents’ parking spaces following reports of improper use. The landlord’s requirement for car registration details prior to allocating a resident a designated parking space is consistent with effective estate management and in line with its policy.
7. The landlord accepted its communication about the new parking rules could have been clearer. It offered the resident £100 compensation for this. This was in line with its compensation policy for moderate service failures that caused distress and inconvenience.
8. The compensation was proportionate for the communication failings and is also in line with our compensation guidance for failures that adversely affected the resident. Our reasonable redress finding is based on the landlord having already paid the resident £100 compensation as offered in its stage 2 complaint response.

The landlord’s handling of window repairs

9. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states it is responsible for window lock repairs, and it will complete routine repairs like this within 60 days. It also states it aims to complete repairs in one visit. The resident raised a window repair on 21 October 2024, and a repair appointment was scheduled for 8 November 2024, within the landlord’s routine repair timescale.
10. The landlord did not dispute that it did not tell the resident the appointment was moved to 2 January 2025. It said the resident then asked it to reschedule that appointment and for it to complete the repairs in one visit. However, it failed to record the resident’s request. As a result, when it re-attended on 13 January 2025 it was not equipped to complete the window repair in one visit. The window repairs were fully completed on 4 February 2025, approximately 4 weeks outside its 60-day routine repair timeframe.
11. The landlord accepted its communication failings. It apologised to the resident for the inconvenience he experienced as a result and offered £100 compensation for its communication failings and £10 compensation for the missed appointment. The compensation offered was in line with the landlord’s compensation policy for moderate service failures that caused distress and inconvenience. It was proportionate for the communication failings and 4-week repair delay. It is also in line with our compensation guidance for failures that adversely affected the resident. Our reasonable redress finding is based on the landlord having already paid the resident £110 compensation as offered in its stage 2 complaint response.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

12. Our statutory Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The landlord’s published complaints policy complies with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales. It says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It will then respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
13. The resident’s complaints were made on 3 and 12 November 2024. The landlord did not raise the complaints until 9 December 2024. On 17 February 2025 it provided a single stage 1 response to address both complaints. This was 51 working days and 45 working days respectively outside its 15-working-day overall response time.
14. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response to address both of the resident’s complaints. While, in the circumstances, the landlord’s decision to respond to both complaints in this way was understandable, it was not in line with its complaints policy or the requirements of the Code. This landlord should have raised a fresh complaint to address the window repair as it was unrelated to the parking complaint that was being investigated. The landlord did not explain its approach to the resident, which was a shortcoming. As a result, the overall complaint handling lacked clarity, and the resident’s frustration was understandable.
15. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 12 March 2025, within its 20-working-day response time. The complaint responses provided by the landlord were detailed and effectively addressed the issues raised in both complaints.
16. The landlord apologised for its complaint handling failings. It offered the resident £200 compensation, made up of £100 for its complaint delay and £100 for its failure to raise the resident’s complaint. This amount exceeded the compensation we would have offered under our compensation guidance for the complaint handling failings identified. The landlord has therefore provided reasonable redress to the resident. Our reasonable redress finding is based on the landlord having already paid the resident £200 compensation as offered in its stage 2 complaint response.

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.

Recommendations

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