Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (202505399)

Background

1. The resident lives on the 13th floor in a block of flats which is served by 2 lifts. He has medical diagnoses which require him to take medication multiple times a day and make using the stairs difficult.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to a power outage in the resident’s block.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was service failure in the landlord’s response to a power outage in the resident’s block.

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

Reasons

4. The landlord’s lift maintenance and breakdown policy (lift policy) confirms it’s responsible for maintaining its lifts.
5. On 4 April 2025 work being carried out to one of the lifts caused a power outage to the resident’s block. This affected the CCTV, security doors, lighting, and both lifts. During the day, the resident emailed the landlord to report he was unable to climb the stairs to get to his property. He said he was unable to take his medication as required and had to buy lunch. It took approximately 5 hours for the landlord to resolve the issue, by which time the CCTV, lights and security doors were operational. One lift was returned to operation half an hour later while the second was repaired a short time after.
6. The landlord’s position was that the power outage was not caused by its failure and was outside of its control. However, an internal email dated 4 April 2025 said it had been caused by a short circuit related to lift works. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response later explained the issue arose because there was some “accidental damage to cabling” while the repair works were being done. While we acknowledge the fault was accidental, it was caused by the landlord’s actions. Therefore, its position was inaccurate.
7. The landlord’s lift policy sets out its response to lift breakdowns. It says it will take immediate action to inform residents. If repairs can be resolved within 24 hours, it will provide updates on anticipated resolution time. Although the landlord has provided evidence to show it contacted residents in the building, there’s no evidence that it telephoned or emailed the resident about the outage or that it provided updates on timescales.
8. The landlord’s lift policy, and its stage 1 complaint response, said it could arrange support for residents with additional needs. The resident told the landlord he was unable to access his medication on the day. Internal email records show that landlord staff noted that the resident was without his medication and queried how best to offer him support. The landlord should have acted quickly to help the resident with his medication. However, it appears that before a solution was identified or contact with the resident was made, the power was restored. The landlord’s suggestion, within its stage 1 response, that the resident should have taken his medication with him before leaving the building was insensitive and counter productive to resolving the complaint.
9. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will consider offering compensation to residents who have been affected by failures in service on a case-by-case basis. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response said there was no provision to refund the cost of the resident’s lunch in its lift policy. It failed to consider if its compensation policy would apply. It also said it could not offer him compensation because it would not be offered to other residents. This was inappropriate because it did not adhere to its policy to consider requests on a case-by-case basis.
10. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response confirmed that compensation was covered by other policies. However, it said they did not cover the type of reimbursement the resident requested. This was inaccurate because its compensation policy says it will consider restoring residents to the position they would have been in had the failure not occurred. This includes out-of-pocket expenses such as increased food costs. The landlord confirmed it considered requests for compensation on a case-by-case basis. However, it did not apply its policy because its position remained that it could not compensate the resident because it would not be reasonable to compensate all residents.
11. The landlord’s response to us stated that it had no record of any vulnerabilities for the resident. This is despite the resident’s complaint disclosing he was on medication and was unable to climb the stairs to his flat. We have made an order to address this issue.
12. The landlord’s failures amount to service failure. While it resolved the power outage in a timely manner, there were failures in its response to the resident’s concerns. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. This is in line with our remedies guidance where the landlord’s failures may not have significantly affected the overall outcome of the resident.

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.