From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Amplius Living (202423518)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202423518

Amplius Living

17 September 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 the resident’s:
    1. Reports of repairs to communal lighting.
    2. Associated formal complaint.

Background

  1. The property is a 2-bedroom flat. The resident has lived there since 2021. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. Records show there being issues with the communal lighting outside the building since 2021 and other residents had reported it numerous times.
  3. On 14 December 2023 the resident fell and suffered a knee injury. She said she fell because it was “pitch black” in the external communal areas due to the lights not working. She made a stage 1 complaint the same day. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 19 December 2023 and responded on 8 February 2024. It offered £75 compensation (£50 for the delay in repairs and £25 for the delayed stage 1 response).
  4. The resident escalated the complaint on 25 June 2024 and the landlord responded on 16 July 2024. It explained its efforts to repair the lighting. It acknowledged service failures and said it was reviewing its repair processes. It offered £200 compensation for lack of contact, stress and inconvenience.
  5. The resident referred her complaint to us. As of September 2024 she said the lights were still not fixed and she had to use a torch in the dark. The landlord offered a further £150 compensation after the internal complaints process. It accepted it had failed to take ownership of the progress of repairs.

Assessment and findings

Communal lighting

  1. Landlord records show other tenants reported and chased the communal lighting being broken from October 2021. While important for context, this report focuses specifically on the resident’s contact with the landlord and her complaint.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord on 14 December 2023 and complained she had fallen due to it being so dark in the grounds as the lighting was not working. She was understandably frustrated as she was aware the lights had not been working for some time. She described the situation as dangerous. It adversely affected her as she sustained a knee injury and had to attend hospital.
  3. The landlord phoned the resident 4 days later to discuss the matter, which was positive. She explained she just wanted the lighting repaired. Case notes show the landlord chasing up the repairs with its contractor but with little progress. The contractor had attended in November and December 2023 but on both occasions had identified the need for more equipment and materials. This was not ideal but somewhat out of the landlord’s control.
  4. The landlord explained the timeline of events in its stage 1 response. The contractor had difficulties finding a sub-contractor to work at height. Once one had been found, an appointment was made for 27 February 2024. However it was not fixed on this date, which was disappointing.
  5. The landlord wrote to resident on 15 March 2024 to say it was upgrading the communal lighting over the next 10 days. It gave the contractor’s details, which was encouraging. However the resident said that, despite the contractor’s attendance, the lights stopped working a few days later. The resident phoned the landlord on 24 June 2024 to chase this. It was unacceptable she had to do this. There was no evidence of the landlord remaining in contact or attempting to progress the repairs, which was a failure in service. Case notes and internal emails showed a lack of ownership and management of the repair. Staff did not appear to know what was happening.
  6. There is evidence of miscommunication between different teams. The landlord relied on the resident informing it when appointments had not been attended or repairs not completed. This was not appropriate. This continued even after the landlord had admitted its failings at stage 2 of the complaints process.
  7. The landlord told the resident a repair inspection was booked for 28 August 2024. When the landlord phoned her on 4 September 2024 it found the inspection had not gone ahead. This was unreasonable and the resident was frustrated at being told different things. The landlord said it would arrange for the repairs team to call her and it would follow up on 16 September 2024 to ensure it happened.
  8. The landlord did adhere to this commitment and contacted the resident on the date specified. The repairs team had not called her as hoped. This was unreasonable and further evidence of miscommunication and a lack of ownership of the issue. Although it was positive the landlord was making effort to speak to the resident, it did not effectively address the delay in repairs. This was a failure.
  9. On 17 September 2024 the landlord told the resident that new lights were planned for 14 October 2024. It said the works were due to last 4 weeks so it would follow up with her after this. The resident understandably said she had no faith in the landlord. The landlord contacted her on 19 November 2024 to ask whether the lights had been replaced. While the contact was a positive and proactive step, the landlord should have already known this itself.
  10. The lights were ultimately fixed in November 2024, nearly a year after the resident’s initial complaint, which is unacceptable. The issue appears to have been ongoing for 3 years in total. There is evidence the landlord did query the matter with its contractor but there was confusion and miscommunication. The landlord failed in its management and ownership of the issue, which contributed to the delay.
  11. We are not able to comment on liability or whether the resident’s injury was a direct result of the landlord’s failures. That is a legal and insurance issue. However, we can say that the landlord not providing the resident with its insurance details until April 2025, was unreasonable. This should have been provided during the complaints process, which the landlord later recognised.
  12. The delays and failures caused the resident frustration, stress and a feeling of being unsafe in the communal grounds in the dark. It also cost her time and effort in chasing the landlord. The landlord offered £400 compensation in total (during and after the complaints process) for its handling of lighting repairs. This is in line with our remedies guidance for the level of failure evidenced, which had an adverse effect on the resident. However, as £150 of this was offered after our involvement, it cannot be considered reasonable redress.
  13. The landlord has acknowledged its failings and accepted it got things wrong. It explained it has a new process where a single member of staff leads each complaint and takes ownership to ensure repairs are done. The landlord said it has reviewed all outstanding works and made quality control improvements. It has also introduced methods to manage its performance. This is positive and welcome and reflects our Dispute Resolution Principle of learning from outcomes.
  14. There were continuous delays in communal lighting repairs. While the landlord is entitled to rely on its contractor, there was a lack of management and miscommunication. Due to the length of time it occurred and the negative impact on the resident, this amounts to maladministration. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £400 compensation (less any sum already paid for the lighting complaint) in recognition of the stress, time and inconvenience caused.

Complaint handling

  1. When the landlord acknowledged the stage 1 complaint of 14 December 2023, it said a response would be given by 24 January 2024. This was not in line with its complaints policy, which says a response should be received within 10 working days. The proposed date was 26 days after the complaint was made.
  2. The landlord phoned the resident on 18 December 2023 and 18 January 2024 to discuss the complaint, which was positive. On 24 January 2024 it said it needed to extend the response time. Its policy allows for an extension of 10 working days so informing the resident of this was reasonable. It was, however, disappointing the response had already been delayed up to this point.
  3. The stage 1 response recognised this and offered £25 compensation. This was reasonable as the delay was not excessive and did not impact the substantive issue. The landlord had also made telephone contact with the resident during this time. The content of the response was also appropriate, outlining the timeline of events and what was planned.
  4. The stage 2 response was issued within target timescales and was detailed. It explained the repairs history and what was booked in the future. Importantly, the landlord accepted it had failed regarding the substantive issue and said what was being done to improve this. Overall, the landlord has offered reasonable redress for its complaints handling. It is recommended to pay the resident the £25 compensation as offered (if not already paid).

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to communal lighting.
  2. In accordance with 53.b of the Scheme the landlord offered reasonable redress in response to its complaint handling.

Order

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to provide evidence that it has paid the resident £400 compensation (less any sum already paid for the communal lighting) for the stress and inconvenience caused by its repair delays.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord is recommended to pay the resident the £25 compensation as offered at stage 1 for its delay in complaint response (if not already paid). The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this being paid.