Be One Homes (202411172)

Background

1. The resident lives in a one-bathroom property with her children. One child has additional needs and requires full access to washing facilities. She complained in May 2024 to the landlord that there was a leak in her bathroom since October 2022. It completed the repair in December 2024.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of the:
   1. Bathroom leak repairs.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found the landlord:
   1. Offered reasonable redress in its handling of the bathroom leak repairs.
   2. Offered reasonable redress in its complaint handling.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord did not follow its policy when dealing with the bathroom leak repairs. However, it acknowledged this failing and provided proportionate compensation in line with our compensation policy to recognise the detriment to the resident.
5. The landlord did not provide its complaint response within the expected timeframe. It apologised for the delay and offered compensation for this. The landlord explained the reason for the delay and communicated this to the resident. The level of compensation offered was proportionate to the service failure and consistent with our compensation guidance for complaint handling delays.

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.

6. The landlord’s repairs policy said a responsive repair would be completed in 21 calendar days. A routine repair, such as a full replacement bathroom, would be completed within 90 calendar days.
7. The evidence shows the landlord raised a job to repair the bathroom leaks on 21 December 2023. The job was completed on 2 January 2024. It raised a further job to replace the bath panel and pipe boxing. A message on 3 January 2024 said it would complete the repairs within 3 weeks. This shows it aimed to complete the repair within its policy timeframe.
8. The resident said on 15 February 2024 the leak was still there. She said the landlord had not replaced the bath panel or pipe boxing. This shows it did not complete the repair within the policy timeframe. She reported the occurrence of further issues because of the leak between then and 1 May 2024, such as loose tiles and an unstable bath. This shows the landlord did not complete a long-lasting repair to the leak. An inspection took place on 8 May 2024.
9. In its stage 1 response on 25 June 2024, the landlord acknowledged issues since October 2022 in providing a long-lasting repair to the bathroom leak. It said the target date to complete all repairs would be 8 August 2024. This was 90 calendar days after the inspection. The landlord upheld the complaint and offered £150 compensation.
10. The landlord moved the resident and her family out of the property while it completed the bathroom repair in the first week of August 2024. This shows it considered her family’s needs and vulnerabilities which required full access to a bathroom.
11. The resident told the landlord on 12 August 2024 that there was still a leak in the bathroom. It carried out a further inspection on 9 September 2024 and confirmed the leak was ongoing. This suggests that it did not repair the bathroom leak to a reasonable and lasting standard.
12. The landlord’s stage 2 response on 4 October 2024 said the previous repair work was below standard. It said it would fix the bathroom leak and complete a full bathroom refit by the end of October 2024. It said the resident and her family would move to another property while the repairs took place. It upheld the complaint and offered £935 compensation. This shows it acknowledged the significant impact of being temporarily moved out of her home and the length of time the family were without reasonable wash facilities.
13. The evidence shows the landlord resolved the bathroom leak by December 2024. It paid the compensation to the resident in January 2025. It accepted it did not complete a reasonable repair within its policy timeframe. It took steps to investigate and resolve the leak. It also considered the resident’s family circumstances by providing alternative accommodation while it completed major repairs. It offered compensation that was proportionate and consistent with our compensation guidance for situations which had a significant impact on the resident. Therefore, we find the landlord offered reasonable redress in this matter. As the landlord had paid the compensation, we have made no further orders or recommendations.

14. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time complies with the definition of the complaint in the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Code (the Code) April 2024. The timeframes in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
15. The resident raised a complaint on 7 May 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 9 May 2024. This is within its policy timeframe to acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. It sent its stage 1 response on 25 June 2024. This was 24 working days longer than the 10 working days timeframe. It apologised for this delay and offered £50 compensation. This amount is in line with our compensation guidance for complaint handling delays of a short duration with no long-term impact on the resident.
16. The resident escalated her complaint on 15 July 2024. The landlord acknowledged the escalation on 22 July 2024 and said it would respond within 20 working days. Between August and September 2024, it contacted her 3 times to request an extension to the response timeframe. It said it was awaiting further information before it could issue a response. This follows its complaints policy which allows an extension on top of 20 working days where there is a good reason.
17. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 4 October 2024. This is 59 working days after the complaint was escalated and outside its policy timeframe. It apologised and said within its response the extension was agreed with the resident as it needed more information before providing its stage 2 response. The extra information was about confirming dates for her temporary move were aligned with the bathroom repair. It was reasonable for it to have this information so it could provide an informed stage 2 response.
18. Overall, the landlord did not meet the timeframes set out in the Code. It did explain the reasons and provided an apology for the delays in responding. It offered £50 compensation, which was paid to the resident in January 2025. The apology and compensation fall within our compensation guidelines for complaint handling failures where the impact was low, there was a short delay and did not affect the overall outcome for the resident.
19. The delays did fall outside the Code’s expectation of requesting an extension, however, it did communicate and sought agreement from the resident. It gave a reasonable explanation for the delay in its response and took proportionate steps to address the delays. Therefore, we have found reasonable redress in its complaint handling. As the landlord had paid the compensation, we have made no further orders or recommendations.

Learning

20. This case shows the importance of timely complaint responses, in line with the Complaint Handling Code. Delays occurred at both complaint stages, which required apologies and compensation to put matters right. Our centre for learning via our website offers resources to support landlord’s with complaint handling.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

21. The delays in complaint responses highlight the reliance on complete and accessible repairs records. Where information is not readily available to all relevant staff members, this can contribute to extended response times and frustration for residents.

Communication

22. The landlord’s decision to provide a direct contact number for a named caseworker was a positive step to improve communication during the repairs. This supported the clear communication with the resident while works were ongoing.