A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202113684)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202113684

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

23 October 2022


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s reports of the repair issues to the guttering and downpipe.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared ownership leaseholder of the landlord.
  2. The resident initially reported on 16 July 2021 that there was blocked guttering and a broken downpipe on the external of the building. The landlord raised a work order on 19 July 2021 and the repair records show that the appointment was subsequently cancelled.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 13 September 2021, as the landlord had not responded to her reports of the damaged downpipe. In her complaint escalation, she raised additional concerns regarding the frequency in which the guttering was being cleared and asked the landlord whether it was completing quarterly site visits to identify any repair issues.
  4. In the landlord’s final response, on 2 February 2022. It acknowledged that there had been a delay in completing the required works caused by human error and communication issues. It apologised for the lack of communication from the contractors. It increased its offer for delays from £85 to £240 and for poor communication from £50 to £100, a total of £340. It said further staff training had been provided regarding communication between departments and contractors. It had reinforced its service levels with its contractors.
  5. Following completion of the complaints process, the landlord advised this Service on 24 August 2022 that it had offered the resident a further £80 compensation on 22 March 2022 for additional delays in completing the works.
  6. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she remained dissatisfied with the time taken by the landlord to complete repairs to the downpipe. She said she had not received assurances that the landlord would carry out site visits at regular intervals.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has raised additional concerns regarding  repair issues to the sewage stack pipe, however, the landlord has addressed this as part of a different complaint, which has been raised to this Service separately. As such, this report will focus on the issues within the complaint raised on 13 September 2021, about the guttering and damaged downpipe.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repair issues to the guttering and downpipe.

  1. In accordance with the lease agreement, the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure and external parts of the building, including pipes and drains. As such, when the resident reported issues with the guttering and the downpipe, the landlord was responsible for assessing the issues and completing any required repairs. The landlord’s repair policy states that standard, non-urgent repairs will be completed at the “next available appointment that is convenient with the customer”. Although it does not have a specific timeframe, typically landlords are expected to complete routine repairs within 20 working days.
  2. It is not disputed that the landlord exceeded an appropriate timeframe to complete the required repairs. The resident initially reported that the guttering was blocked and the drainpipe was damaged on 16 July 2021, and by the time of its final response to the complaint the repairs had still not been completed. The landlord apologised for the delay in the works and acknowledged they were caused by human error and internal communication issues for which it offered the resident £340 compensation.
  3. The landlord has advised this service that following the completion of the formal complaints process, it offered the resident a further £80 compensation on 22 March 2022, for additional delays in completing the works, bringing the total offered to £420.
  4. The landlord’s repair records show that the repairs to the guttering and downpipes were not completed until 10 August 2022. A recommendation has therefore been made that the landlord consider whether further compensation might be due for any delays between its final response to this complaint, of 2 February 2022, and the completion of the works.
  5. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  6. Following the resident’s report that the guttering was blocked and the downpipe was damaged on 16 July 2021, it was reasonable that the landlord raised a work order on 19 July 2021, however the appointment was subsequently cancelled, which the landlord stated in its stage one response was due to contractor illness. While this was an unavoidable reason for the initial delay, there is no evidence to suggest that the resident was informed of this at the time, or that the landlord attempted to reschedule the appointment. As a result, the landlord’s poor communication contributed to the delay. The landlord also advised in its stage one response that scaffolding was required to complete the work, as such it was understandable that the repairs would take longer to complete due to the complexity of the required works.
  7. The landlord raised a work order on 4 November 2021, to clear the gutter and renew the tiles on the roof. Work to the roof was completed on 22 December 2021, however the guttering repairs remained outstanding. The landlord explained in its final response that, as multiple repair issues had been raised on one work order, it had been mistakenly closed before all the required work was completed. It also explained that additional delays were caused due to a delay in the inspection and authorising scaffolding. The landlord would have been expected to keep the resident updated on any reasons for delays, however, there is no evidence to confirm that it did. As a result of the landlord’s poor communication, the resident had to chase the repairs, which caused her additional time and effort in pursuing the issue.
  8. In its stage two response, the landlord advised that staff members had been given additional training in ensuring attention to detail with work orders, when multiple tasks have been added to the same order. It also stated further training had been provided regarding communication between departments and contractors to ensure residents are kept appropriately updated. The landlord also reinforced its expected service levels with its contractors. As a result, the landlord has demonstrated that it acknowledged the causes of the delays and has taken steps to ensure that recurrence of the issue is avoided.
  9. The landlord noted that it did not have records of the resident’s contacts between August and December 2021. The Ombudsman would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts and repairs, yet the landlord has acknowledged that the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures. In its complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that its omission was potentially caused by the information not being recorded or the contact being raised with a different team. A recommendation has therefore been made that the landlord review its record handling procedures to ensure that it is able to access all information regarding contacts, regardless of whether it was raised with different teams within the landlord.
  10. The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging its mistakes and apologising to the resident. It put things right by completing the repairs and awarding the resident a total of £420 compensation. The compensation award was in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance which states that amounts between £100 and £600 are considered proportionate in cases where there has been considerable service failure or maladministration but where there has been no permanent impact on the resident.
  11. In this case, although it would have been inconvenient for the resident to chase the repairs, there was not a direct significant impact on the resident by the outstanding works, which the landlord ultimately completed. As such, the landlord has made redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily. The landlord also demonstrated that it learnt from the outcomes by confirming that further staff training had been provided regarding communication and handling of repairs. The measures taken by the landlord to address what went wrong were proportionate to the impact that its failures had on the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will respond to stage one complaints within ten working days. The resident raised her complaint on 13 September 2021 and the landlord did not issue its stage one response until 21 November 2021, thus exceeding its complaint response timeframe. The landlord has not acknowledged the delay, or the impact caused to the resident, so as such the issue remains unresolved. 
  2. In accordance with this Service’s complaint handling code, landlords should address all points raised in the complaint, and provide clear reasons for the decisions. In this case, the landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns regarding the frequency of inspections. As a result, there was a missed opportunity to manage the resident’s expectations regarding the level of service she could expect to receive. It also caused the resident additional time and effort in pursuing the issue, without a resolution. The landlord should confirm its obligation regarding inspections to the resident.
  3. As the landlord has not acknowledged its complaint handling failings, this element of the complaint remains unresolved. In line with this Service’s remedy guidance, the landlord should award the resident £100, in light of the additional time and effort caused to the resident in pursuing the complaint. The landlord should also ensure that it addresses the resident’s concerns regarding the schedule of works for inspections of the condition of the property.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of repair issues to the guttering and downpipe prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to apologise and pay the resident £100, as a result of the complaint handling failures outlined in this report.
  2. The landlord should write to the resident and confirm its obligations regarding buildings inspections.
  3. The landlord should confirm that it has adhered to these orders within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not done so already, it is recommended that the landlord pays the resident the £420 compensation already offered to the resident.
  2. That the landlord review its record handling procedures to ensure that it is able to access all information regarding contacts, regardless of whether it was raised with different teams within the landlord.
  3. That the landlord consider whether further compensation might be due for any delays between 22 March 2022 and the completion of the works.