Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202337625)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202337625

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

20 October 2025

 

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 its offers of temporary accommodation to the resident during repairs.

Background

  1. The resident’s assured tenancy began in 2015. The property is a 2 bedroom basement flat where she lives with her children.
  2. The landlord was due to undertake works to the resident’s property and had told her that she needed to move out while they took place. She complained, on 27 April 2023, that its offers of temporary accommodation earlier that day were not suitable for her mobility needs. She stated her wish for a permanent move.
  3. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, the following month, acknowledged her reasons for refusing the accommodation offers it had previously made in 2022. It stated its position regarding its more recent offers and proposed other measures it could take.
  4. It is unclear when the resident escalated her complaint but the landlord’s stage 2 response, on 18 July 2023, said that she remained unhappy with its accommodation offers. It further noted her unhappiness that its contractor had attended, despite knowing that the works could not be completed while she remained at home.
  5. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response explained why the contractor had attended. It apologised that it had not communicated this clearly. It explained why it considered its recent offers to be reasonable but that it would try to find ground floor accommodation. It stated the lessons it had learned to improve its future service. It offered £100 compensation for the resident’s time and trouble.
  6. The resident asked the Ombudsman to investigate her complaint because, later in 2023, she said that the landlord had made her move back to her property too soon, and she had experienced numerous issues following this.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

  1. No evidence has been seen that the resident formally complained about issues during, or following, her temporary accommodation stay later in 2023. Because of that these matters have not been considered in this report. If the resident has concerns about the landlord’s handling of matters that have occurred since her complaint concluded in July 2023, she could consider making a new complaint to the landlord. She could then return to the Ombudsman and ask us to consider her new complaint.

The landlord’s handling of temporary accommodation offers

  1. The resident’s complaint said that the landlord’s temporary accommodation offers had effectively been like for like with her property. She said that, in the years since she had accepted her property, her mobility had been significantly impacted by medical conditions. She further explained the increased size of her family meant that she now wanted a permanent move to a property suitable for her needs.
  2. The landlord’s stage 1 response, on 16 May 2023, gave a clear explanation of why temporary accommodation, rather than a permanent move, was being offered but provided housing options advice so she could explore a permanent move herself. It acknowledged her mobility circumstances and said it would make an aids and adaptations referral for her current property. It also suggested different options for her temporary accommodation, all of which demonstrated its consideration of her complaint and needs.
  3. The landlord’s stage 2 response on 18 July 2023 accepted that, while similar to the resident’s property, the accommodation it had offered in 2022 had not been suitable for her current needs. It stated the lessons it had taken from this in terms of assessing updated mobility needs before making an offer.
  4. The landlord explained that both of its more recent temporary accommodation offers had lifts, which meant access to them was better than her own home. It acknowledged the resident’s concerns about lift breakdowns, but maintained that the offers were suitable for her needs and encouraged her to consider this. It nonetheless said that it would also keep looking for ground floor temporary accommodation, which demonstrated a resolution focused approach.
  5. The landlord further explained it had sent a contractor to the resident’s property “to try and carry out interim work to make you more comfortable in your home until a decant could be arranged”. It apologised that this had not been fully explained. It noted the need, in the ‘lessons learned’ section of its response, to ensure that it “clearly communicate appointments”. Its offer of £100 compensation for this, and her time and trouble, was in line with our remedies guidance for a failing of this scale and nature, with no long-term impact.
  6. Overall, the landlord explained why it was offering temporary accommodation and provided appropriate housing options advice. It accepted and apologised that its contractor had attended without an effective explanation and that accommodation had been offered the previous year without considering the resident’s current mobility needs. It demonstrated its learning from this, and its consideration of the resident’s needs with its more recent offers. Its complaint responses were resolution focused and offered compensation in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves her complaint.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should pay the resident any part of its £100 compensation that it has not already done so.