Abri Group Limited (202006482)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202006482

Abri Group Limited

12 October 2021

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

The resident has complained about the landlord’s handling of repairs, in particular:
1. Repairs to her front door.
2. Repairs to an insecure electrical socket.
3. Repairs to the door of a kitchen unit and a kitchen drawer.
The resident has complained about the landlord’s handling of other repair and maintenance matters, including faulty electrics in her property, disrepair to the shower, and leaks from her wet room.
The resident has complained about the landlord’s complaint handling.

Jurisdiction

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 39(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of other repair and maintenance matters, including faulty electrics in her property, disrepair to the shower, and leaks from her wet room are outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
Paragraph 39(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure”. A landlord should have the chance to consider and resolve a matter complained of within its Complaints Procedure before this Service can assess how it dealt with the matter complained of. In accordance with paragraph 39(a) this investigation has focussed on the matters raised within the complaint that exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure on 14 June 2021, and which the resident subsequently confirmed were unresolved.
The resident in her contact with this Service and at different times with her landlord has raised other repair issues including faulty electrics in her property, disrepair to the shower, and leaks from her wet room. She has explained that while the landlord has attended to these repairs, she is unhappy about the recurrent nature of these issues. However, the role of the Ombudsman is to consider how a landlord has dealt with a formal complaint and as these issues have not completed the landlord’s complaints procedure, this Service cannot investigate the landlord’s handling of these issues in accordance with paragraph 39(a) of the Scheme. However, reference has been made to these complaints to put the resident’s complaint in its full context and to inform the orders and recommendations made on the complaint.

Background and summary of events

Policies and Procedures

The landlord’s Repairs Policy dated December 2020 states that:
1. “We operate an appointment system based on a 24-hour emergency response to make safe or an appointment-based job system for non-emergency repairs.”
2. “We have a Complaints policy and Customer Relations procedure, and should a customer be dissatisfied with any aspect of our repairs service they can make a complaint through any one of our contact methods and it will be handled in line with the procedure.”
The landlord’s previous Repairs Policy lists several Repair Priorities:
1. Critical Repairs: within 4 hours.
2. Emergency Repairs: within 24 hours.
3. Urgent Repairs: within 7 calendar days.
4. Routine Repairs: within 31 calendar days.
5. Planned/cyclical repairs: specified date.
The landlord has a two stage Complaint Policy. The policy states that the landlord “commit(s) to responding to complaints within 10 working days, where possible.” At Stage 1:
1. “Complaint Officers are required to detail the investigation they have completed for each individual complaint, including their findings. Complaint Officers must also offer justification into the outcome they reach and further actions to be taken to put things right with our customer.”
2. “Where suitable, we will always call the customer to explain our investigation findings, unless the customer has expressed they don’t want us to. This provides the Complaint Officer with the opportunity to confirm what information has been reviewed, what they found, the outcome of their investigation into the complaint, and what action we may be taking to put things right to repair the relationship with the customer. The customer can also ask any questions they may have and provide feedback on the complaint investigation and outcome.”
3. “A written response will then be sent to the customer, confirming what has been discussed and agreed during the telephone conversation.”
The Complaint Policy confirms that “If the customer remains dissatisfied following with the outcome of their complaint at Stage 1, they have the opportunity to escalate their concerns to Stage 2.”

Summary of Events

The landlord on 7 July 2020 raised an order to carry out repairs to a kitchen cupboard door near her sink and a drawer, and it attended the resident’s property on 15 July 2020. After the visit it ordered replacement parts. According to the resident the landlord made a further appointment for 17 November 2020 to attend to the kitchen although the landlord has not provided evidence of a visit of this date.
The resident has advised this Service that she wrote an email of complaint on 6 January 2021and received an automated response with ref 1043080-Y5X199. The landlord has not provided a copy of this email to this Service but has stated that on 4 January 2021, she emailed a complaint regarding outstanding repairs including the kitchen cupboard front near the sink and the drawer front in a separate unit.
On 29 January 2021 the landlord attended to install the kitchen parts, ordered on 15 July 2020. It has advised this Service that it could not obtain the same parts as the kitchen had been discontinued so it obtained the closest match. However, the resident refused the works as the parts did not exactly match the kitchen.
On 4 and 8 February 2021 the resident advised this Service that she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of electrical works, a faulty shower, a replacement washing line and its general handling of repairs. She advised that she had complained about these issues in her email of 6 January 2021. On 10 February 2021 this Service wrote to the landlord advising it of these issue and asking it to investigate and respond to the resident’s complaint.
After the resident advised this Service on 23 February 2021 that she had not received a response to her complaint, this Service on 24 February 2021 asked landlord to respond. The resident called again on 4 March 2021, following which this Service wrote again to the landlord on 11 March 2021 chasing the response.
On 12 March 2021 the landlord sent a “final” response to the complaint. It noted that all works had been completed aside from the electrics being checked, which was scheduled for 22 April 2021. The landlord apologised for the delays in completion of the works and offered £120 as compensation. The resident responded to the landlord on the same day noting that the kitchen door and drawer were still in disrepair. She also mentioned disrepair to her wet room.
On 26 March 2021, the resident made a new repair request for her kitchen. Also, on 26 March 2021 the resident reported a repair to a double socket stating it was not attached to the wall. The landlord established that the faceplate was loose with no exposed wires and agreed an appointment for 26 April 2021. The landlord, according to its statements to this Service, on 26 April 2021 left a voicemail for the resident changing the appointment to 14 June 2021 due to staff absence and no available electrician on that day.
After being sent a copy of the complaint response of 12 March 2021 the Ombudsman on 27 April 2021 wrote to the landlord noting that the response did not provide the resident the opportunity to escalate her complaint, in variance to this Service’s Complaints Handling Code. This Service also noted that the resident had advised she remained dissatisfied as there were outstanding repairs, she had not received the compensation offered and she was unhappy with its communication. This Service asked the landlord to send a Stage 2 response within 20 working days, taking these points into account.
On 28 April 2021, in response to the resident’s report of 26 March 2021, the landlord attended to install the best match kitchen parts, but the resident again refused access, as she did not want the closest match.
On 18 May 2021 the resident reported gaps to her front and back door, causing security issues. The landlord attended the following day but could not gain access. The landlord consequently raised another works order as an emergency. It has advised that it adjusted the lock keep and door hinges to front door, as the top hinges “play” due to design and two screws turning in holes. It also adjusted the back door keep. However, it transpired that the resident raised another repair on 21 May 2021, booking an appointment for 13 July 2021. The landlord’s repair records advised that it then advised the resident that it would replace the hinges.
On 27 May 2021, the landlord re-sent the complaint response of 12 March 2021 to the resident, adding that she could contact this Service if she was dissatisfied and stating that it was the final response. On the same day, this Service contacted the landlord which accepted that it should not have re-sent the response of 12 March 2021 but reassigned the case to a senior manager and escalated to Stage 2. This Service set a deadline of 10 June 2021 for final response.
The landlord has informed this Service that on 14 June 2021, due to the electrician experiencing vehicular breakdown, it phoned and messaged the resident to change the appointment for the double plug socket repair to 4 August 2021.
Also, on 14 June 2021 the landlord sent the final response to the complaint. It apologised for the delay in paying the Stage 1 compensation of £120. The landlord also apologised for the delays in its communication on the complaint for which it offered a further £150 compensation. The landlord confirmed works that were outstanding:
1. “Double Plug Socket Repair – Booked for 4th August.
2. Internal Door Latch – Booked for 16th June.
3. Gully & Soak away Repairs – Booked for 19th July.
4. Guttering Repair – Booked for 2nd August.
5. Front Door Hinge Replacement – Booked for 13th July.”
The landlord confirmed that a section of the kitchen needed to be replaced but as the parts had been discontinued, it would replace the parts with a near match or a white replacement. The landlord also advised that it would call the resident to discuss what support she needed and of other agencies that could provide support.

After the complaints procedure

The landlord raised another repair for the kitchen on 23 June 2021; however, when it attended on 10 August 2021, the resident again refused to allow completion of the works.
On 28 June 2021, the resident’s MP wrote to this Service advising that he had written to the landlord 14 January 2021 about faulty and dangerous electrics, leaks coming through her ceiling (close to light sockets) and a broken shower but had not received a response. He advised that the resident was primarily concerned that front door did not lock and was still in disrepair.
On 13 July 2021 the ordered three hinges and a follow-on repair to the door was arranged for 26 August 2021.
On 19 July 2021 the resident confirmed to this Service that the following repairs remained outstanding:
1. Door fixing – hinges are noisy and need repairing.
2. Electric socket is hanging off of the wall
3. Kitchen cupboard front (near the sink) needs repairs. The drawer in a separate unit also needs repairs as it fell out, broke and the resident threw it away.

This Service confirmed to the parties that this investigation would focus on these repairs.

On 27 August 2021 the resident advised this Service that the landlord carried out a repair to her door the previous day, but the door was misaligned, did not shut properly, the frame was hanging off and she could not unlock the door.
On 21 September 2021 the resident made a new complaint about her front door which she stated still did not lock and unlock easily. She advised she wanted a new door and frame. She advised that there was no hot water from her shower which she related to recurrent electrical issues and that she wanted a bath installed. The resident also stated that she could not easily use the wet room.
On 7 October 2021 the resident advised this Service that the door repairs had been satisfactorily resolved.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the resident’s front door.

The resident reported a gap to her front and back doors on 18 May 2021. The landlord’s initial response was adequately prompt, in line with its timeframe for Emergency Repairs under its current Repairs Policy. As further works were required, it was in line with the policy that the landlord made an appointment for the further works.
The landlord’s Stage 2 complaint response confirmed that further works, specifically to replace hinges, were booked for 13 July 2021. The landlord attended this appointment as planned. The landlord has not provided evidence why the repairs were not completed at the appointment of 13 July 2021 given that it had already identified that it needed to replace hinges. The need to arrange another appointment, after delivery of three hinges, caused inconvenience to the resident. However, ultimately the landlord was taking steps to meet its obligation that the resident’s door was in good repair. It was in accordance with the Repairs Policy that the landlord raised another appointment and there is no evidence that the doors remained unlockable or other presented an emergency situation that required a different response. The resident has confirmed that the landlord attended on 26 August 2021.

Repairs to an insecure electrical socket

The resident reported a repair to the electrical socket on 26 March 2021. As the Repairs Policy states that the landlord should arrange an emergency repair within 24 hours, the landlord acted appropriately in ascertaining whether the situation constituted an emergency. Having ascertained that this was not the case, as there were no exposed wires, it was in line with the policy that the landlord agreed an appointment.
The appointments of 26 April 2021 and of 14 June 2021 were both rearranged. The landlord rearranged the appointments on the day, according to the information provided to this Service. There were unforeseen reasons for the appointments not being met but rearranging the appointment at a late stage undoubtedly caused inconvenience to the resident, who would have made arrangements to provide access.
The Ombudsman considers it appropriate that a landlord provides compensation for missed appointments. Where an appointment is rearranged on the day, as in this case, it is consistent with this Service’s Dispute Resolution Principle of Being Fair that a landlord considers how much notice it provided to the resident, what explanation it provided and what inconvenience the resident experienced. There is no evidence that the landlord considered these points, with it simply stating in the Stage 2 response that the repair to the socket would now be completed on 4 August 2021. As such the landlord’s response to this complaint was inadequate as it did not take into account the full circumstances of the repair, in particular, its communication on the repair and the inconvenience caused to the resident from the missed appointments.

Repairs to the door of a kitchen unit and a kitchen drawer

The landlord’s initial visit to repair the kitchen items on July 2020 was in line with the timeframe for urgent repairs and therefore was adequately prompt. As new parts were needed it was appropriate that the landlord sought to source them. It was not until six months later that the landlord re-attended the resident’s property to complete the repair. There is no evidence that the landlord explained the delay or otherwise kept the resident updated during this timeframe, thereby it did not take steps to manage her expectations and alleviate the inconvenience from the outstanding repair. However, it offered compensation in its Stage 1 response, and whilst it did not clarify how the award was calculated, the sum of £120 is in line with what this Service may award in cases of service failure resulting in some impact on the complainant, as outlined in this Service’s Remedies Guidance. As such it provided reasonable redress for the delay.
At the appointment on 29 January 2021, and at further appointments on 28 April 2021 and 10 August 2021 the landlord sought to complete the kitchen repairs but could not do so as it could not obtain like for like parts. The landlord’s repair obligation is to keep the kitchen in good repair. In seeking to install new parts the landlord was seeking to ensure that the kitchen remained in good repair. It is understandable that the resident would want like for like parts; however, this is a cosmetic issue. Insofar as the landlord established that like for like parts could not be obtained and sought to install as close a match as possible, its actions to effect the repair were reasonable.

Complaints Handling

With regards to the landlord’s complaint handling, it has advised that it received a complaint from the landlord on 4 January 2021 regarding the kitchen issues. Its initial response was delayed, outside the 10-working day timeframe. There may be circumstances when it is reasonable for a complaint response to be delayed, for instance, whilst the matter complained of, such as repairs, is being dealt with. However, in such circumstances the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to send holding responses so as to manage the resident’s expectations. There is no evidence that holding responses were sent in this case.
Furthermore, the initial response of 12 March 2021 was unclear and did not meet the requirements of the Complaints Policy. The response stated that “all” works had been completed without making clear what works had been considered. The response made reference to electrical works which is inconsistent with the complaint the landlord said it received on 4 January 2021. Also, the response accepted that there had been delays and offered compensation of £120; however, without the details of what repairs had been considered and what delays had occurred, the response was vague and arbitrary.
The landlord’s Complaints Policy is prescriptive, stating the member of staff should confirm what information has been reviewed, what they found, the outcome of their investigation into the complaint, and what action the landlord may take to put things right to repair the relationship with the customer. However, the landlord did not respond to complaint in such a way, either verbally or in writing.
Furthermore, the response of 12 March 2021 was contrary to the Complaints Policy in stating that it was final response and not advising the resident of her right to escalate her complaint. Compounding this, when this Service asked the landlord sent a response at Stage 2 on 27 April 2021, the landlord simply re-sent to response of 12 May 2021, only escalating the complaint after further guidance from this Service. This caused further delay and inconvenience to the resident.
In the Stage 2 response the landlord acknowledged delays in its complaints handling and offered £150. Landlords should seek to provide redress for service failures. The offer of £150 is in line what this Service may offer in cases of service failure resulting in some impact on the complainant, as outlined in the Remedies Guidance. As such, the landlord offered reasonable redress for delays.
However, aside from the delays there were other failures in the landlord’s complaints handling. As noted above, the initial response of 12 March 2021 was unclear and did not meet the requirements of the Complaints Policy. It did not explicitly address the issues raised in the complaint that the landlord stated it received on 4 January 2021.
Furthermore, when this Service wrote to landlord on 10 February 2021, it identified that the resident was unhappy about the landlord’s handling of electrical works, a faulty shower, a replacement washing line and its general handling of repairs. The MP according to his email of 28 June 2021 to this Service had also raised these issues with the landlord in January 2021. However, there is no evidence that the landlord responded to these matters within a formal complaint, or otherwise confirmed its position on these issues to resident or this Service. It may be the case that the landlord was carrying out works to resolve these repair issues. However, this should not prevent a formal complaint being raised also if the resident expresses dissatisfaction with the repairs service, as recognised in the landlord’s Complaints Procedure.
The resident also in her response of 12 March 2021 indicated that she was unhappy with her wet room. The landlord also did not investigate her concerns or respond to this issue, again missing an opportunity to resolve this aspect of her case.
Overall, there was a lack of clarity in the landlord’s complaints handling, with the landlord missing several repair issues raised by the resident. Whilst the resident may have raised different issues at different times, the landlord had a responsibility to confirm to the resident its understanding of her complaints and how it would be dealing with the issues raised. This is in line with this Service’s Complaints Handling Code which states that “landlords should confirm their understanding of the complaint and the outcomes being sought with the resident. Clarification should be sought if the complaint is not clear”. However, the landlord did not do this. As a result, the landlord missed opportunities to resolve all of the repair and maintenance issues that the resident was unhappy about, and to manage her expectations as necessary.
It is acknowledged that the landlord has advised this Service that since responding to the resident’s complaint, it has reviewed its handling of complaints and introduced enhanced controls, a redesigned training curriculum and quality assurance checks, as well as new complaint officer performance management processes.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the resident’s front door.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to an insecure electrical socket.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the door of a kitchen unit and a kitchen drawer.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaints handling.

Reasons

Whilst the repeated appointments to repair the resident’s front door caused her inconvenience, the landlord acted in line with its repair obligation by seeking to repair the door and making appointments to do so.
Whilst the landlord completed the repair to the electrical sockets, there were two missed appointments. The landlord’s response to this complaint was inadequate as it did not consider the full circumstances of the repair, in particular, its communication over the repair and the inconvenience caused to the resident by the missed appointments.
The landlord in offering compensation of £120 in its Stage 1 response provided reasonable redress for the delay in obtaining the necessary parts to complete the repairs to the kitchen after the visit of July 2020 and for not keeping the resident updated. In seeking to install new parts the landlord was seeking to meet its obligation to keep the kitchen remained in good repair. As the landlord established that like for like parts could not be obtained, it was reasonable that the landlord sought to install as close a match as possible.
Overall, there was a lack of clarity in the landlord’s complaints handling, with the landlord missing several repair issues raised by the resident. Whilst the resident may have raised different issues at different times, the landlord had a responsibility to confirm to her its understanding of her complaints, the outcomes sought and how it would be dealing with the issues raised. As a result, the landlord missed opportunities to resolve all of the repair and maintenance issues that the resident was unhappy about, and to manage her expectations as necessary.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord pays the resident the compensation offered within its complaints procedure if it has not already done so.
The landlord pays the resident £50 compensation in respect of the distress and inconvenience caused to her from failing to consider full circumstances of the repair to the electrical socket and the inconvenience caused by the missed appointments.
The landlord pays the resident £100 in respect of distress and inconvenience caused to her by the failings in its complaints handling.
The landlord contacts the resident to confirm whether she wishes to pursue her complaints about its handling of electrical works, the faulty shower and the replacement washing line. If so, the landlord should confirm with the resident its understanding of her complaints at this point in time and then accordingly investigate and respond to the complaints in line with the Complaints Policy.

Recommendations

The landlord is recommended to contact the resident again to ask her whether she wishes for it to proceed with the repairs to the kitchen. It is also recommended that the landlord show her the parts it wishes to install,
The landlord provides further training and guidance to all staff with responsibilities for dealing with formal complaints so that they are aware of the policy and procedure that they should follow, and of any standard response templates that should be used.