Irwell Valley Housing Association Limited (202345613)

Background

1. Following a rent increase, the resident raised concerns to the landlord about the condition of the property including several cracks. The landlord arranged work to resolve the issues. The resident complained after it rescheduled a repair appointment. He was unhappy he took time off work for the appointment and with the landlord’s delay resolving repairs.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Repairs.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

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

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs

4. The landlord apologised for its handling of the resident’s repairs. It offered compensation but it was not proportionate to its failings.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

5. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint in line with the complaint handling code. It failed to acknowledge and address this in its 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.

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.

Recommendations

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

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 did not investigate

6. In his communication with the landlord, the resident said he was unhappy about the level of rent. He does not feel the rent is reasonable or reflects the condition of the property. We are unable to determine or comment on the level of or reasonableness of the rent, as this falls outside our jurisdiction. It would be more appropriate for the resident to refer his concerns to the First Tier Tribunal.
7. After the landlord’s stage 2 response and following the resident bringing his complaint to us, the landlord completed a review of the case. It assessed his radiators in March 2025 and arranged to assess his loft insulation in April 2026 further to his heat loss concerns. It has made a separate offer of compensation to the resident for its delays in this work. If he is unhappy, he can make a new complaint and escalate it to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure if he is not satisfied. If he remains unhappy with its final response, he can ask us to investigate further. We have not investigated the new issues after its final response. This investigation focuses on the complaint the resident made in December 2023 for which he received a final complaint response in February 2024.

What we did investigate

8. Following notification of a rent increase in May 2023, the resident sent the landlord pictures of cracks from previous water ingress in the property. The landlord inspected the property on 9 June 2023. It did not provide us a copy of its inspection report and said it did not find any records.
9. After its inspection, the landlord arranged for its surveyor to assess the cracks in the plaster from a previous leak, replace a cupboard door and a spare room socket. While this investigation looks at the landlord’s overall handling of the repairs, we have referred to the different repairs as subheadings for ease.

Plastering repairs

10. Following its inspection in June 2023, the landlord’s surveyor assessed the plastering work on 2 August 2023. The landlord did not provide us a copy of the report and its repair records do not record the outcome. On 24 August 2023, the resident contacted the landlord for an update because it did not get back to him and he was concerned because more cracks appeared. It told him it received a quote for the external work, which needed to take place before any internal work, and it would raise a job for its contractor to complete this.
11. The landlord told us it completed external roofing and guttering work on 17 October 2023, which included a drone survey. This work is not on the landlord’s repair records and it told us it could not find any records for the drone survey.
12. On 16 November 2023 the landlord told the resident the external work was complete and it would arrange internal plaster work. It told him it did not have a completion timescale. On 20 November 2023 it raised jobs to patch repair the cracks in the lounge and bedroom. It also raised work to whitewash the plaster patch in the spare room.
13. On 4 December 2023 the resident contacted the landlord because he received a text message which said it changed his repair appointment from 6 December 2023 to 11 December 2023. He said this was not convenient and explained he had pre-booked annual leave from work. He was unhappy with the communication he had with its staff member about this, and he wanted compensation for loss of earnings and complained.
14. In its stage 1 response the landlord told the resident it rescheduled the appointment due to unforeseen circumstances. It acknowledged the new appointment was not convenient and apologised that due to workload capacity, this was not addressed and the appointment still went ahead. It confirmed it had rescheduled the plastering work for 31 January 2024. It told him the failed appointment did not meet its criteria for loss of earnings compensation. Its compensation policy allows for a payment of £20 where it failed to keep an appointment without giving the resident 2 working days notice. It apologised for the incorrect contact number its staff member gave, said would feedback and gave the correct number to escalate any future issues.
15. The landlord told us it completed all plastering work on 31 January 2024. The resident was unhappy with the work it completed and its stage 2 response. He said the plastering work was not acceptable and brought his complaint to us.
16. After the landlord’s final complaint response, it arranged a post inspection with the resident, which it completed in July 2024. This found cracks to the ceiling and walls in the kitchen and hallway but said no cracks in the property were greater than 3mm. Its repairs policy says any cracks less than 3mm are the resident’s responsibility to make good. The report recommended guttering work and work to cut out saturated plaster. The landlord has been in contact with the resident about this and to check about any outstanding repairs.
17. The resident told us the landlord has completed all the work, other than internal decoration and paintwork. He wants the landlord to complete the internal decoration work. In its stage 1 and stage 2 response, the landlord offered the resident a £100 decoration voucher. This was in line with its repairs policy which says decoration is the resident’s responsibility and where it is the result of the landlord’s repeated failure to complete a repair, it will offer a decoration voucher.

Electrical socket repair

18. The landlord told us the spare room socket was previously blanked off in 2021, and the resident did not report any issues until he brought his complaint to us. However the resident raised this issue with the landlord before bringing his complaint to us, and it addressed this in its stage 1 response.
19. After its inspection, the landlord told the resident it was unsure whether to replace the socket before or after the plastering work. It said it would ask its surveyor to include this in its assessment and organise work after its visit. On 16 November 2023 it told him an electrician would connect the socket once the plastering work was complete.
20. The landlord raised work to connect the socket on 2 January 2024 and in its stage 1 response, it told the resident it would attend on 14 February 2024. The landlord told us it could not find notes relating to repairs for this date because of its system migration. It recorded this job complete on 10 July 2024. Prior to this completion date, it re-raised another work order on 4 March 2024 to connect the socket. It recorded this job as completed on 19 August 2024 with no additional notes. However, this was when the landlord told us it attended but there was no answer, which its repair records do not reflect.
21. Following escalation to us, the landlord asked the resident if the repair was still outstanding and said it could not find evidence it resolved this. The resident told the landlord it had already been replaced. Due to its poor records, we have been unable to determine when it completed this repair.

Door repair

22. The landlord told us door repairs were not part of the resident’s original complaint. However, it addressed this repair in its stage 1 response. There was some confusion about which door needed repairing. In its stage 1 acknowledgment, the landlord referred to a bathroom door, but in its stage 1 response it said it understood the repair was to a cupboard door. The resident told us it was both the bathroom and cupboard door which had been switched around.
23. After its inspection the landlord told the resident it located his earlier requests for the cupboard door but due to confusion, the work was cancelled. It told him it was difficult to investigate why this was due to the time and age, but confirmed it raised a new order.
24. On 16 June 2023 the landlord raised an order to supply and fit a new cupboard door and to use the handle from the existing bathroom door. On 20 June 2023 it told the resident it arranged an appointment for 27 July 2023 for this work. It recorded this job as complete on 30 June 2023 and recorded ‘no further action’.
25. In August 2023 the landlord contacted the resident because it was unsure if it replaced the door. The resident told the landlord its contractor told him the work was cosmetic and was the resident’s responsibility.
26. After the resident complained about the door repair the landlord raised another repair for 2 January 2024. In its stage 1 response the landlord confirmed it made an appointment for the door repair on 14 February 2024. The landlord told us that due to its system migration it could not find notes relating to repairs for this date. It is unclear what work the landlord did for the jobs it raised for the resident’s door repair.
27. The resident said the landlord initially swapped a damaged bathroom door with his cupboard door and hung it upside down in his bathroom without locks. Following his complaint, and despite contractors measuring the cupboard door several times, he said the landlord switched the doors back to how they were originally.
28. As part of the resident’s dissatisfaction with its stage 2 response, the landlordarranged an inspection in July 2024.Its surveyor found damage to the bathroom door but could not conclude the cause or when it happened. The resident told us his bathroom door was damaged before his tenancy. The landlord told us it appeared the damage was caused by the resident. We are unable to concludeif this damage occurred before or after his tenancy.
29. The landlord told us it was not responsible for internal doors under its repairs policy but said it could not find evidence it told the resident. However, its repairs policy confirms it is responsible for repairing internal doors and says to seek advice if it is damage rather than wear and tear. It has contacted the resident since our involvement to resolve any outstanding joinery door repairs.

Summary

30. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs was poor. Its repair records do not accurately reflect the work its done and outcome of its inspections or repair visits. It told us it was not responsible for internal doors yet raised repairs in 2023 and 2024 for an internal door repair. Its repairs policy says it would complete routine repairs within 28 working days and other non urgent and major repairs within 60 working days. It explained there were delays in plastering work due to roofing and guttering work which it had to complete first. It said there were internal issues with contractor availability and its budget. Where repairs are complex or take longer than expected we expect landlords to update residents and manage their expectations, but the landlord did not do this.
31. The landlord told us it discussed the concerns the resident had about its staff member with the manager. However, it told us it was unable to provide evidence of this or that it discussed the resident’s concerns regarding the lack of empathy.
32. The landlord’s communication was poor.It contacted the resident to book repairs, which it had already completed,and arrange repairs which it said were not its responsibility. It told us it was not responsible for internal doors but cannot evidence it told the resident this. It was awarethe resident was not available before 2:30pm, butit did not add an alert or update its system about his availability until March 2025.
33. In view of the landlord’s delays, poor records and communication we found maladministration. In its stage 1 response, the landlord apologised and offered £150 compensation plus £100 decorating vouchers. In its stage 2 response it increased its offer to £250 and repeated its offer of £100 decorating voucher. Its offer is not proportionate to the failings we identified and impact on the resident. In line with our compensation guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident an additional £200 for the distress and inconvenience its delay resolving the issue and communication caused the resident.

34. The landlord’s complaints policy said it would respond at stage 1 within 10 working days of its acknowledgement. This was not in line with our former complaint handling code (the Code) in use at the time, which said landlords must respond at stage 1 within 10 working days of the complaint being logged.
35. The landlord’s complaints policy said it would respond at stage 2 within 20 working days of an escalation request. It said it could extend a further 10 working days at both stage 1 and stage 2. This was in line with the Code.
36. For the purposes of this assessment, we have assessed the landlord’s complaint handling using our former Code (2022), which was in use at the time.
37. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 1 complaint in line with the Code. It sent its stage 1 response 26 working days after it logged the resident’s complaint, which was also a day after the timeframe it gave in its extension. This was not in line with the Code, which said any extension over 20 working days would need to be agreed with the resident.
38. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint in line with the Code. It sent its stage 2 response 21 working days after the resident’s escalation request.
39. While the 6 working day delay at stage 1, and 1 working day delay at stage 2, was unlikely to cause any significant impact, the landlord failed to acknowledge and address this in its complaint response. In view of this, we found service failure. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £25 compensation in line with our guidance on compensation for service failures which the landlord did not acknowledge.
40. We have not ordered the landlord to review its complaints policy because it updated its policy. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints policy. It says it will acknowledge complaints at both stages within 5 working days. It will respond to complaints at stage 1 within 10 working days, and stage 2 within 20 working days of the acknowledgement. The landlord’s definition of a complaint and response timescales are in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code)

Learning

41. The landlord should learn from this case with regards to managing and handling complaints in accordance with our Code.
42. It was positive the landlord took further action following the resident bringing his complaint to us. However, the resident should not have needed to complain to us for it to review the case and try to address its failings.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

43. The landlord should ensure its repair records are accurate and complete. It should ensure it has a full record of its inspections showing what issues it found and what follow on work it completed.
44. The landlord should review and incorporate the best practice highlighted in our Spotlight report on knowledge and information management.

Communication

45. The landlord should consider how it can improve its communication with residents for repair and inspection updates. It should also consider how it communicates with contractors to ensure it is aware of what work was completed.