Clarion Housing Association Limited (202413054)

Background

1. The resident told the landlord about a sinkhole which appeared in her back garden. She subsequently raised concerns about the length of time it took to the landlord to complete the remedial repairs.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of sinkhole repairs.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s complaints handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found there was reasonable redress in:
   1. The landlord’s handling of the sinkhole repairs.
   2. The landlord’s complaints handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The sinkhole repairs

5. The landlord accepted there were delays in completing the works to the sinkhole. It made a reasonable offer of compensation across its internal complaint responses and completed the repairs in the months that followed its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord acted reasonably in resolving the issue, given the complex nature of the sinkhole repair.

The complaints handling

6. The landlord also recognised the delay in responding to the resident complaint. The delay was minor and did not appear to affect the overall outcome to the resident’s complaint. The landlord made an offer of compensation in recognition of this delay. This was also reasonable in the circumstances.

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.

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.

7. The resident first reported the sinkhole at the end of October 2023. Although the landlord was aware of the issue, it did not take any immediate action to make the area safe. This was a failing. Its repairs policy requires emergency repairs to be made safe within 24 hours where there is a risk to the resident’s safety and security.
8. The landlord’s inaction resulted in the resident chasing the landlord throughout November and December 2023. The landlord’s own timeline of events, which it has shared with us shows that the sinkhole was not made safe until around the end of December 2023. This represents a delay of approximately 2 months, significantly exceeding the timescales set out in its policy.
9. Following the make-safe works, the landlord arranged for contractors to investigate and provide a quote for permanent repairs. It declined the initial quote due to high costs. While this decision caused some further delay, it was reasonable for the landlord to ensure value for money and appropriate use of its resources.
10. In its complaint responses, the landlord acknowledged the delays and apologised. It committed to completing the repairs and keeping the resident updated. It offered a total of £600 compensation for the delays in completing the sinkhole repairs.
11. The repairs were completed around 2 months after the landlord’s final complaint response. It was positive the landlord monitored the repairs through to completion following its final complaint response and made an offer of compensation reflecting the failures it had identified and the impact the delays had on the resident.
12. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to pay the compensation it offered across its complaint responses.

13. At the time of the resident’s stage 1 complaint, the landlord was following its interim complaints policy. This said that stage 1 complaints would be acknowledged within 10 working days and responded to within 20 working days. It also said that stage 2 complaints are acknowledged within 10 working days and responded to within 40 working days.
14. The resident submitted her stage 1 complaint on 5 January 2024 which the landlord responded to on 2 February 2024. This was within the 20 working days specified in its policy for a response.
15. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 26 March 2024. The landlord responded on 29 April 2024. By this point, the landlord appears to have been following its new complaints procedure, which came into effect from April 2024. Its response was issued 3 working days outside the 20 working day timeframe specified under the new policy.
16. The landlord acknowledged the delay in its stage 2 complaint response and offered the resident £50 compensation. While any delay would have caused some inconvenience, it was positive the landlord recognised this and made an offer of compensation. The amount offered was reasonable in the circumstances.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

17. The landlord’s records were sufficiently detailed and proportionate.

Communication

18. The landlord accepted that it could have been more proactive in its communication. It was positive the landlord reflected on this as part of its complaint responses. There is an opportunity for the landlord to embed this learning into its future handling of similar issues where repairs are complex and specialist contractors are required. This could include providing more regular updates, clearly setting out expected timescales, and explaining reasons for delays at an early stage. Doing so would help manage resident expectations and reduce any uncertainty.