Midland Heart Limited (202424463)

Decision
Case ID	202424463
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Midland Heart Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	15 May 2026

Background

The resident signed her tenancy agreement with a previous landlord which merged with the current landlord in 2006. She has a number of health conditions the landlord is aware of. Her daughter is the landlord’s main point of contact and her representative for this case. For ease, the resident and her daughter will be referred to as ‘the resident’ in this report.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for a kitchen and bathroom replacement.
We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for a kitchen and bathroom replacement.
There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Landlord’s response to the resident’s request for a kitchen and bathroom replacement.

The landlord’s communication with the resident has been limited.

Landlord’s complaint handling.

The landlord’s complaint responses were sent outside of the expected timeframe. The landlord also failed to follow up on actions it said it would do in the stage 2 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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 12 June 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must provide evidence that it has paid directly to the resident £250 compensation. This is made up of: An additional £200 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s request for a kitchen and bathroom replacement. An additional £50 for its complaint handling failings.	No later than 12 June 2026
3	Contact order The landlord must contact the resident and provide both the resident and us with an update in relation to the kitchen and bathroom replacements.	No later than 12 June 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
8 July 2024	The resident complained to the landlord. She said: The kitchen and bathroom were “falling apart and no longer fit for purpose”. She had asked for a new kitchen and bathroom for years. She was told her bathroom was due to be replaced in 2023 but had since been told it was not due until 2048. The kitchen condition and configuration of cupboards are “not fit for purpose anymore” due to her health conditions.
15 August 2024	The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response, where it upheld the complaint. It said: It acknowledged the resident had raised concerns about the kitchen and bathroom condition since 2019. The kitchen and bathroom have an average life expectancy of 30 years. The kitchen was renewed in 2010 and was due for renewal in 2030. The bathroom was renewed in 2003 and was due its next renewal in 2033. It had completed stock condition assessments of the kitchen and bathroom in 2019 and 2024. It concluded neither needed to be renewed but some kitchen repairs were required. It apologised for the delayed complaint response and offered £100 compensation. It offered £150 compensation for ‘service shortfalls’ where it had contacted the resident, rather than her daughter.
6 July 2025	After contacting us, the resident escalated the complaint to stage 2. She said the kitchen and bathroom were unfit for use and had not been replaced since the property was built in the 1990’s.
16 September 2025	The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response, where it upheld the complaint. It said: It acknowledged repairs had been consistently raised for the kitchen and bathroom dating back to 2019. It had completed a stock condition assessment in 2019 and an additional assessment in 2024. Both assessments concluded neither room required a full replacement at that time. Following the complaint escalation, a surveyor attended on 21 August 2025. The surveyor said the kitchen was ‘beyond economical repair’ and the bathroom ‘would benefit from renewal’. It had referred the kitchen and bathroom for renewals which it aimed to complete within 15 weeks. The renewals would be managed by its Aids and Adaptations team who would contact her. It acknowledged the resident raised concerns in relation to whether the property would be suitable for her long-term needs. Repairs had been attended to within service level agreements, and it was entitled to rely on stock condition surveys to estimate renewal dates. But it recognised a significant number of repairs for the kitchen and bathroom had been required frequently over a long period of time. And renewal requirement should have been identified earlier. It awarded an additional £650 compensation in addition to the £250 already offered. This was made up of £250 for failure to identify renewal requirements earlier, and £400 for the inconvenience of repeated repairs and poor condition of both rooms.
23 December 2025 to 4 February 2026	The resident contacted us multiple times. She said: She had not heard from the landlord despite chasing on several occasions. The kitchen and bathroom replacement has not progressed. The compensation had been paid.
12 May 2026	The landlord said it had contacted the resident, and the bathroom renewal was provisionally scheduled for 1 June 2026. However, the resident had since said she would like to move so it would not proceed with the bespoke kitchen adaptation.

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.

Complaint	Landlord’s response to the resident’s request for a kitchen and bathroom replacement.
Finding	Maladministration

We acknowledge the resident raised concerns with the condition of the kitchen and bathroom for many years. But there is no evidence of a formal complaint being made until 8 July 2024. We encourage residents to raise complaints in a timely manner, normally within 12 months of issues arising. This is so the landlord can consider them whilst they are still ‘live’ and whilst the evidence is available to properly investigate. Therefore, we will consider events from 8 July 2023 onwards (12 months prior to the resident’s formal complaint). The end date is 11 February 2026 when the complaint became ‘duly made’ with this service.
The resident’s tenancy agreement says the landlord will carry out reported repairs and keep the home in good repair.
The landlord has not provided any policies or procedures which set out the frequency of its home renewal or refurbishment programs. Nonetheless, the ‘Decent Homes Standard’ sets out the required standards of a property for it to be considered decent for living. The Decent Homes Standard says:
1. The criteria for a property to be considered a decent home is that the:
  1. Kitchens should be “reasonably modern” which is taken to be “20 years or less”. Accordingly, 20 years is taken in this investigation as a very broad guideline as to how often kitchen refurbishment would ideally be undertaken.
  2. Bathrooms should be “30 years or less”. Accordingly, 30 years is taken in this investigation as a very broad guideline as to how often a bathroom refurbishment would ideally be undertaken.
2. The definition of ‘poor condition’ is where there is a major repair needed or where there is a need to replace three or more items out of six (Annex “A”, section 3 of the Decent Homes Standard).
The landlord’s repair records show it raised and completed repairs to the kitchen and bathroom in September, November and December 2023. The records do not show any further concerns about the condition of the kitchen or bathroom until the resident raised a complaint on 8 July 2024. In response, the landlord raised a work order on 31 July 2024 to assess the condition of the kitchen and bathroom. While this was a reasonable step, it was 3 weeks after the resident raised her concerns, which was a delay.
The landlord visited on 5 August 2024 and noted:
1. 2 kitchen doors were damaged.
2. 1 drawer needed replacing.
3. The resident said she wanted a new kitchen with tumble dryer space.
4. The bathroom skirting boards and bath panel needed replacing.

The landlord used its complaints process to manage the resident’s expectations about replacing the kitchen and bathroom. This was appropriate. However, it could have raised the necessary repairs itself instead of asking the resident to contact it again.

The landlord completed another stock condition survey on 31 October 2024. It recorded that the kitchen and bathroom were in “good condition”, although one kitchen cupboard door “appeared loose.” The landlord has not provided the survey. However, its inspection records show the damage to the kitchen units was cosmetic. Given this, the landlord acted appropriately when it decided to carry out repairs rather than replace the kitchen. The available evidence does not show that the kitchen met the threshold for replacement under the Decent Homes Standard.
The landlord did not take any further action until the resident escalated her complaint 8 months later. Internal emails dated 31 July 2025 show that the landlord then raised a new inspection, which was appropriate.The surveyor visited on 21 August 2025, 3 weeks later, and advised that the kitchen required replacement. The landlord’s stage 2 response explained the next steps for renewal. However, the landlord did not contact the resident again until 20 November 2025. This was a delay.The resident told this Service on 4 February 2026 that the landlord had still not contacted her again. This was a further delay of over 2 months.
The landlord can rely on advice from suitably qualified staff when assessing the condition of the kitchen and bathroom. It also acted appropriately by arranging further inspections after contact from the resident and offering compensation. However, it:

a. Accepted that it should have identified the need for replacement earlier.
b. Failed to communicate effectively with the resident, which contributed to delays.
c. Did not actively manage the kitchen and bathroom replacement, and it had not completed the work by May 2026.

Overall, the landlord did not manage the resident’s request effectively. We therefore find maladministration. We order the landlord to pay an additional £200 to reflect further distress and inconvenience caused since the stage 2 response.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code says:
1. Stage 1 complaints should be acknowledged within 5 working days, and a response sent within 10 working days of the complaint being acknowledged. Any extension must be no more than 10 working days.
2. Stage 2 complaint should be acknowledged within 5 working days, and a response sent within 20 working days of the complaint being acknowledged. Any extension must be no more than 20 working days.
3. Outstanding actions must still be tracked and actioned promptly with appropriate updates provided to the resident.
The stage 1 complaint:
1. Response was sent 28 working days after the complaint was raised. However, we acknowledge the landlord apologised, offered compensation, and told the resident it needed more time.
2. Response was not sent to the resident’s preferred email address, which led the resident to chase on 23 August 2024, and caused inconvenience.
The stage 2 complaint:
1. Was escalated to stage 2 by the resident on 6 July 2025. While the landlord called the resident 3 days later, it did not formally acknowledge the escalation until 10 working days later, which was a delay.
2. Response was sent 51 working days after the complaint was raised. However, we acknowledge the landlord apologised and told the resident it needed more time to investigate.
3. Failed to follow-up on actions raised in the stage 2, in line with the Code.
4. Did not award additional compensation for the delayed complaint response.
Overall, there was minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided, and it did not fully put this right. There was therefore service failure and an order for an additional £50 compensation is made in line with our compensation guidance.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord should keep clear and complete records of inspections, surveys, and repairs to evidence its actions.

Communication

The landlord should provide regular, proactive updates, including what will happen next and when.