Settle Group (202411912)

Decision
Case ID	202411912
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Settle Group
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	23 June 2026

Background

1. The resident reported a number of repairs which she felt were related to the condition of the property when she moved in.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about:
   1. Levelling the back garden.
   2. Repairing floorboards.
   3. Insulated cavity closers being installed.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found that:
   1. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to levelling the back garden.
   2. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to repairing floorboards.
   3. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to insulated cavity closers being installed.
   4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint.

We have made an order for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Levelling the back garden

5. While the resident had to chase to progress the garden work, the landlord acknowledged this and made an appropriate offer of redress for the failings. It also carried out work in the garden that exceeded its responsibilities under the terms of the tenancy agreement.

Repairing floorboards

6. The landlord has carried out some work but there were failings with progressing the repairs, communication and managing the resident’s expectations. The landlord made an appropriate offer of redress.

Insulated cavity closers being installed

7. The landlord carried out work to address the warmth of the property. There was a missed opportunity to either progress the last job relating to this matter or update the resident and manage her expectations. The landlord made an appropriate offer of redress.

Complaint handling

8. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with the timescales in its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). However, it did not address all the issues that the resident raised in her escalation, and it did not log new issues at stage 1 but instead incorporated them into the existing complaint at stage 2.

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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 to recognise the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 24 July 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend the landlord contacts the resident to explain its approach to the levelling of the garden and discuss any concerns that she has over the quality of the work carried out.
We recommend the landlord provides the resident with an action plan that details the scope of works and timescales involved in completing the floorboard work.
We recommend the landlord contacts the resident to clarify the outcome of the inspection that was carried out to determine whether insulated cavity closers could be installed at the property.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
13 July 2023	The resident made a complaint. She said parts of her house are excessively hot in summer and freezing cold in the winter. The resident said she had been told by workmen that there was no cavity wall insulation or loft insulation. She said her energy bills were very high and she had a large energy bill debt. The resident thought the insulation issues could be the cause of the high bills. She also said she was promised a larger radiator in her daughter’s bedroom which had not been completed.
27 July 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It detailed the dates of inspections; work it had carried out and communications it had with the resident about the insulation and radiator. The landlord said it would increase the loft insulation, fit a larger radiator in her daughter’s bedroom and carry out an energy performance survey of the property. The landlord said it had responded to repairs and completed work where necessary. It acknowledged that its communication could have been better so awarded £50 compensation for time and trouble.
24 November 2023	The resident escalated her complaint. She said she owed £3,000 to her energy company. The resident told the landlord that her floorboards were creaking, and work was needed in her garden. She said the garden needed levelling and the fence was failing down. The resident was dissatisfied that the landlord had recently told her it was her responsibility to maintain the garden when the garden had been in such a mess when she moved in.
22 December 2023	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said a heat loss survey was carried out in August 2023 and 6 new radiators had been installed. The landlord said the property had wall insulation already in place and a recent energy performance certificate rated the property as band C. It said it had contacted the resident to support her with the energy debt. The landlord said it attended the property to inspect the garden, the windows and the cavity insulation. It listed works it would carry out inside the property and in the garden and other inspections it would carry out. The landlord said it had given the resident a £50 voucher to help with heating costs and the energy debt would be cleared on 22 December 2023. It acknowledged that its communication had not been to the standard expected and that it should have addressed the resident’s concerns more quickly. The landlord awarded the resident £250 compensation.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response. She said there were outstanding matters with the garden and the floorboards. The resident said that the garden was not level and work to the floorboards was taking a long time and had been disruptive. She said the landlord had inspected the property to see if it was feasible for insulated cavity closers to be installed but had not contacted her about the outcome. The resident wanted the work carried out and compensation.

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	Levelling the back garden
Finding	Reasonable redress

9. The resident contacted the landlord on 24 August 2023 because she was unhappy with the condition of the garden. The resident told the landlord she had many problems with the garden that were there when she moved into the property. She said these matters had never been looked into. The resident said that the landlord had previously advised that it was not its policy to maintain gardens, but she did not agree with this.
10. Landlord records showed that it attended on 8 September 2023 to inspect the garden. This was an appropriate response to the matters the resident had reported.
11. On 11 September 2023 the landlord wrote to the resident. It said the resident had raised an issue with a tree in her garden in March 2020. The landlord said it had agreed to remove the tree but had advised the resident that any other garden works were her responsibility.
12. This was in line with the landlord’s tenancy agreement which states that the resident is responsible for maintaining the garden. This includes all trees, hedges, grassed areas and flowerbeds. The landlord reiterated the terms of the tenancy agreement to the resident.
13. It said if the resident needed help to maintain the garden, she could ask family or friends to help. The landlord said she may be able to obtain assistance from voluntary organisations to help. It also stated an option was to notify the landlord to make an application for a transfer to a smaller, more manageable property, if eligible. These were reasonable solutions quoted from the tenancy agreement.
14. The resident chased the landlord on 18 September 2023 to check work had been booked in. Notes on the landlord’s repair records identified that no follow-on work had been raised. A landlord internal email asked for the resident to be contacted to let her know if garden work was going to be carried out. We have not seen evidence that this matter was discussed with the resident. This was a missed opportunity.
15. The resident chased the landlord about the garden work again on 19 October 2023. We have not seen any evidence that the resident received a response. She escalated her complaint on 24 November 2023 and included the garden work within this complaint.
16. As part of the stage 2 investigation a contractor visited the resident’s property to inspect the garden. A further visit from the landlord took place on 20 December 2023.
17. In its stage 2 response the landlord said some levelling of the rear garden was needed. It said it had already completed work on the fencing and would also:
    1. Remove the concrete at the top of the garden.
    2. Level the ground by filling in holes with soil from the top of the garden.
    3. Review the resident’s request on whether it could move the concrete slabs under the trampoline, ideally to be re-laid as a patio or removed.
    4. Reinspect the tree in 12 months’ time as it was currently healthy.
    5. Return to grass seed the affected areas, once the ground works had been delivered, as described above.
18. The landlord’s records showed that between March 2024 and June 2024 there were further communications with the resident about the scope of the garden works. It was unclear what date the garden works took place. The invoice for the work was dated 28 June 2024. The invoice showed the scope of the work had been extended since the stage 2 response to include removing an ash tree and laying turf.
19. The resident confirmed garden works had taken place but said that the garden was still not level. She said the landlord only levelled part of it, levelling it up to a certain point. The resident said the landlord did not return to carry out the grass seeding. She also said the concrete slabs under the trampoline had been removed but did not get re-laid.
20. As turf was laid, it may be reasonable that grass seed was not used. The landlord did not make a commitment in its stage 2 response to re-lay the concrete, so we are unable to determine this as a failing. If the resident was not satisfied with the quality of the work carried out and the amount of levelling of the garden that took place, she may want to contact the landlord to discuss this.
21. The resident’s stage 2 complaint featured other complaint matters. As the landlord awarded £250 for time and trouble for all the complaint points raised, we have attributed £125 to the external repair aspects of the complaint and £125 to the internal repair aspects of the complaint. This level of compensation was in line with our compensation guidance for maladministration.
22. The landlord raised the payment request for the stage 2 compensation on 27 December 2023 and told the resident it would be in her bank account within the following 7 days.

Complaint	Repairing floorboards
Finding	Reasonable redress

23. Our Scheme allows us to investigate complaints that have not exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure if there is evidence of a complaint handling failure and we are satisfied that the landlord has not acted within a reasonable timescale. The complaint handling failure is addressed in the complaint handling section below.
24. On 18 September 2023 the resident reported that her floorboards were creaking in the landing, toilet and all the bedrooms. She said it was so noisy that her neighbours next door could hear them.
25. A floorboard inspection was carried out on 30 October 2023. The inspection identified that there was a “very bad problem with all floorboards squeaking throughout the whole of the top floor”. It also noted that a lot of work had been done on the floorboards prior to the resident moving into the property.
26. There was no evidence to show the landlord followed up on the problems identified in the floorboard inspection. On 12 August 2024, nearly 10 months later, another work order was raised for the floorboards. This was for a further investigation into the cause of movement and noise of the flooring.
27. There was no evidence to show what the outcome of this inspection was, but the landlord told us that it started work on the floorboards on 9 September 2024. The resident told us work also occurred in February 2025 but that did not resolve the matter. She said the landlord was now trying a new solution. The resident told us on 10 June 2026 that the back bedroom had been completed, and she was waiting on dates for the other rooms to be addressed. She said the landlord had agreed to put in new skirting boards and carpet after work on the floorboards had been carried out.
28. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord has to repair the structure and exterior of the property which it listed includes flooring. The landlord told us that there were no structural issues with the flooring and therefore the work it had carried out was outside of its repairs offer. We have not seen evidence of how the landlord reached its decision to carry out work on the floorboards if it felt it was not responsible.
29. The resident said the work carried out on the floorboards was dragging on and disruptive. She said the household were living on mattresses on the floor for a year as they kept needing to move their belongings between rooms for the work to be carried out.
30. We appreciate the disruption the work will have caused. However, it is not unreasonable or a failing if multiple visits are needed to try and identify the cause of the problem. We appreciate that some repairs can be difficult to identify and can require multiple visits.
31. As referenced above, the landlord offered the resident £250 compensation in it stage 2 response and we have attributed £125 of this to the internal repair aspects of the complaint. As there are two internal repair aspects that we are investigating, we have attributed £62.50 to this matter. This level of compensation was in line with our compensation guidance for service failure.

Complaint	Insulated cavity closers being installed
Finding	Reasonable redress

32. The resident contacted the landlord on 12 June 2023 about there being no insulation in the property. Further details of what the resident said or the outcome the resident was seeking had not been appropriately logged. This was acknowledged in a landlord internal email dated 15 June 2023.
33. The resident made a complaint and also escalated the matter to stage 2. During the complaints process the landlord carried out many actions to address the problem and support the resident with the cost of heating her home.
34. The landlord inspected the loft insulation on 14 July 2023 and as a result of this inspection carried out work on the loft insulation. It carried out a heating survey in August 2023 and installed 6 new radiators. The landlord carried out an energy performance inspection. This identified that the energy rating of the property met the government’s Decent Homes Standard.
35. The landlord also helped the resident with her energy bill and debt. It issued the resident with a £50 voucher to help with the costs of heating the property. The landlord allocated a community investment coordinator to support the resident with dealing with the energy debt. It cleared the resident’s £3,000 debt with her energy supplier.
36. In its stage 2 response the landlord listed some further actions it was going to take regarding the warmth of the resident’s property. One of these actions was to remove one of the UPVC cover strips to the window reveals to determine whether it was able to install insulated cavity closers.
37. The resident told us that the landlord had carried out the inspection for this. There was no evidence of when this inspection took place. We have also not seen evidence of any communication between the two parties about the outcome.
38. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have contacted the resident after this inspection and to tell her about whether any work was going to be carried out. This was a missed opportunity to either progress the work or manage the resident’s expectations.
39. The landlord offered the resident £50 compensation at stage 1 which it increased to £250 on 3 October 2023 for the matters relating to the warmth of the property. This was processed on 24 November 2023. The landlord told the resident it would be in her bank account within the following 7 days.
40. As referenced above, the landlord offered the resident £250 compensation in it stage 2 response and we have attributed £125 of this to the internal repair aspects of the complaint. As there are two internal repair aspects that we are investigating, we have attributed £62.50 to this matter. Therefore, the total compensation offered for issues relating to the warmth of the property throughout the complaints process was £312.50. This level of compensation was in line with our compensation guidance for maladministration.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Maladministration

41. The landlord’s complaints policy, including complaint definition and timescales, were compliant with the Code. At the time of the resident’s complaint the Code was not statutory, but the landlord’s complaints policy stated it complied with the guidelines and best practice in the Code.
42. All acknowledgements and responses were issued within the correct timescales in line with the landlord’s policy and the Code.
43. The landlord did not address all the points the resident had raised in her escalation request. It missed out the repairs to the floorboards. This was not in line with the Code which states landlords must address all points raised in the complaint. By not addressing this complaint point, it meant the landlord did not investigate the matter.
44. The resident’s initial complaint was about insulation and the warmth of her property, and these were the only matters addressed at stage 1. However, the stage 2 response included complaint points about the garden and some repairs to doors.
45. These matters were new complaint points unrelated to the insulation of the property and should have been logged as a new complaint, in line with the Code. This is so the resident can escalate the matters if dissatisfied with the landlord’s initial response.
46. In line with our compensation guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident compensation for the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping) & communication

47. The landlord should ensure it keeps thorough records of the outcomes of its inspections and updates residents in a timely manner. We would encourage the landlord to review the recommendations in our Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) and the key learnings in our Spotlight Report on complaints about repairs. This is to decide if it needs to take any action to improve its record keeping, response to follow-on work and communication with residents about the jobs.
48. We encourage the landlord to keep better records of the complaint definitions raised and ensure that all these matters are addressed in the appropriate stage response, in line with the Code.