Birmingham City Council (202015613)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202015613

Birmingham City Council

27 August 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 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 response to the resident’s request for the repair or replacement of her kitchen units.

Background and summary of events

Repairs policy document

  1. As per the landlord’s repairs policy document, it is responsible for the maintenance and repair of kitchen units.
  2. Section 4.2 of the repairs policy document confirms the landlord’s aim to complete non-urgent repairs within 30 days. If further time is necessary, the resident should be advised of what timescale to expect.
  3. Under section 10.9 of the landlord’s repairs policy document, kitchen unit repairs shall be carried out in the first instance, which may require the one-off replacement of units.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
  2. The resident’s kitchen was installed in October 1992.

Summary of events

  1. On 13 May 2019, the landlord confirmed to the resident that its contractor would carry out repairs to her kitchen cupboard drawer and doors within the next 30 working days. Its repair records confirm that this was completed on 11 June 2019, with no further information being provided.
  2. On 19 August 2019, the landlord’s records confirm that a further repair order was raised. It referenced the previous work item, and advised that the operative had failed to attend the resident’s property on time. She requested that the appointment be rearranged. This work item was completed on the landlord’s system on 20 August 2019, with no further information being provided.
  3. This Service has been provided with no further information regarding related actions or communications between the parties in respect to the resident’s kitchen unit repairs from August 2019 to October 2020.
  4. On 9 October 2020, the resident contacted the landlord to inform it that she had received no contact regarding her requests to it for kitchen repairs for the previous 17 months, including when she made another request to it for the repairs in September 2020.
  5. On 12 October 2020, the landlord issued its stage one complaint response to the resident. It apologised to her for the delay to the repair, and it confirmed that its contractor would carry out the repairs on 10 November 2020.
  6. On 12 October 2020, the landlord raised a repair order for the resident’s kitchen cupboard drawer, cupboard doors and sink unit. This repair order was completed on its system on 10 November 2020, although she made a stage two complaint to it about this on the same date. The resident complained that the landlord’s contractor had told her during the above appointment that the approximately 32-year-old kitchen was “so old” that this was “not repairable”. However, she reported that they also advised that she could not have a new kitchen, for which she requested either a replacement kitchen or an explanation as to how to use her old one when this was “not repairable”.
  7. On 11 November 2020, the landlord issued its stage two complaint response to the resident. It explained that it had a limited budget for such kitchen upgrade work, which it prioritised by carrying out stock condition surveys. The landlord confirmed that it aimed to upgrade those properties “most in need as far as possible with the funding that is available.” It also advised that the resident would be notified when her property was due to be surveyed.
  8. On 27 November 2020, the resident emailed the landlord’s repairs team to again inform it that the contractor was unable to carry out the necessary repairs to her kitchen drawers and cupboard, as they were “too old to be repaired”. She felt that her kitchen units were “not fit for purpose”. As the landlord had already confirmed that the kitchen could not be replaced, the resident did not know what to do. She enquired about its policy to modernise and improve its homes via its annual capital investment and cyclical repairs budget.
  9. On 30 November 2020, the landlord’s repairs team responded to the resident. It advised her that it only dealt with repairs, and provided the details for its capital investment team to further assist her.
  10. On 2 December 2020, the resident requested the escalation of her complaint to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure. In addition to her comments of 27 November 2020, she explained that her kitchen drawers could not open, a door was “hanging off “, and there was a dent in her sink, but that it had declined her requests for their repair or replacement while its website stated that it did update and renew these.
  11. On 3 December 2020, the landlord’s records confirmed that it would be “quite some time” before the resident’s kitchen would be replaced; in the meantime, her concerns should be treated as a repair. If the units were beyond repair, it understood that they should be replaced by its contractor under the repairs contract, and that the matter should be referred to its local repairs team for advice.
  12. On 3 December 2020, the landlord issued its final stage complaint response to the resident. It confirmed that there was “currently no budget for new kitchens”, and that she would be advised when her property was due to be surveyed.
  13. The resident then complained to this Service that her kitchen was “not fit for purpose”, but that the landlord would neither replace this due to a lack of money nor repair the kitchen as its contractor could not do so because this was too old.

Assessment and findings

  1. Following receipt of the resident’s concerns regarding the repairs required to her kitchen units, the landlord was obliged to carry out suitable repairs to these, in accordance with its repairs policy document above at paragraph 2. Having already committed to completing the repairs on 13 May 2019, which was approximately 17 months earlier than its stage one complaint response to her of 12 October 2020, it apologised to her for the repair delay in the stage one response, and it confirmed a repair appointment for 10 November 2020. This was initially an appropriate action for the landlord to take in response to the resident’s complaint to try and resolve her outstanding kitchen unit repairs.
  2. The landlord’s contractor did attend the resident’s property on 10 November 2020, however they were unable to carry out the required work to repair the kitchen units. This led her to escalate her complaint. Although the landlord provided a reasonable explanation as to why it was not able to provide a new kitchen to the resident in its stage two complaint response of 11 November 2020, as it had a limited kitchen upgrade budget that it prioritised via stock condition surveys, it failed to address her concerns over the repairs that she had requested.
  3. This led the resident to request a further escalation of her complaint. Another opportunity was then missed for the landlord to address her concerns regarding the repairs required to her kitchen units. This is because its final stage complaint response of 3 December 2020 failed to explain what actions it intended to take in response to the resident’s complaint about this, other than that it would advise her when her property was due to be surveyed.
  4. These inactions added distress, inconvenience, time and trouble to the resident, and a failure has been found on the landlord’s part for it not addressing a key aspect of the resident’s complaint; this being the repair to her kitchen units.
  5. The landlord has offered the resident an apology for the delayed repairs to her kitchen units. It unclear, however, whether these repairs have since been carried out. Nevertheless, an apology is not proportionate to recognise the detriment experienced by the resident as a result of the considerable delay in these repairs from at least its initial repair timescale of 11 June 2019 until after its final stage complaint response of 3 December 2020. Accordingly, this Service’s remedies guidance suggests compensation awards from £250 for a failure over a considerable period of time to address repairs, and a repeated failure to address all relevant aspects of the complaint.
  6. Therefore, the Ombudsman has ordered the landlord below to pay the resident financial compensation, which is appropriate under this Service’s guidance, and to reflect the impact of its failings on the resident. It has also been ordered below to contact her to arrange to carry out the necessary repair works to her kitchen units.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s request for the repair or replacement of her kitchen units.

Reasons

  1. While the landlord offered a fair and reasonable explanation as to why it could not replace the resident’s kitchen, it failed to evidence that it attended to her request for repairs to her kitchen units. This resulted in her waiting for an unreasonable time for her concerns to be addressed.
  2. The landlord apologised for its delay in completing the repair. However, it did not recognise the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble experienced by the resident in attempting to progress her request for repairs proportionately with financial compensation.

Orders and recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Pay the resident compensation of £250 within four weeks for its delay in completing suitable repairs to the kitchen units in her property, and for her resulting distress, inconvenience, time and trouble.
    2. If it has not done so already, contact the resident within four weeks to arrange for the completion of the necessary repairs to the kitchen units.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Review its record keeping processes for prolonged repairs and repair complaints, including for the retention of contact between it and its contractors, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for these, which provides details of specifically when contact was made, what was said, what the agreed next steps, timescales and expectations were, and what actions subsequently took place.
    2. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its policies and procedures with regard to repairs, complaints and compensation, to seek to prevent a recurrence of its above failures in the resident’s case. This should include consideration of this Service’s guidance on remedies, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/corporate-information/policies/dispute-resolution/policy-on-remedies/, and the completion of our free online dispute resolution training for landlords, if this has not been done recently, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords/e-learning/.
  3. The landlord shall contact this Service within four weeks of this determination to confirm that it has complied with the above orders and whether it will follow the above recommendations.
  4. The Ombudsman accepts that, because of the present restrictions due to the corona virus pandemic, the timing of the above actions will depend on what is reasonable in the light of Government guidance regarding the health of the resident and of the landlord’s staff.