Citizen Housing Group Limited (202307295)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202307295

Citizen Housing

27 November 2024

 

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 response to the resident’s concerns about the security of the block.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which began in May 2012. The property is described as a 1-bedroom flat on the second floor of the block. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
  2. The landlord received reports about the closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras in the block on 8 December 2022. It noted from the reports that none of the cameras located at the bin room, front communal door, rear communal door and covering the car park were working. Its external contractors visited the block between 12 December 2022 and 25 January 2023 to investigate the fault, but they were not able to locate the power supply for the equipment. On their visit on 25 January 2023, the contractors noted that there was a homeless person in the bin room. They also reported to the landlord that the bin room doors were broken and allowing access.
  3. The resident raised a formal complaint to the landlord on 25 January 2023 about the security of the block. He was concerned that a homeless person was able to gain access into the bin room on 19 January 2023. He said it had come to his attention that the cameras at the block had not worked for several months. He asked the landlord to clarify what it was doing to restore the cameras and the measures in place to secure the safety of the residents in the block. He was concerned that the landlord was not ensuring that the bin room doors were securely shut on days when access was not required for waste collection.
  4. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 8 February 2023. It advised the resident that its neighbourhood services visited the block on 27 January 2023 and noted that the doors to the bin room were securely closed when they arrived. It said residents should ensure the doors to the bin room are securely closed each time they access the bin room. It assured the resident that its contractors were working on reinstating the cameras as soon as possible. It also assured the resident that it would check for an update on the repairs and advise. The landlord noted the repairs to the CCTV cameras were completed around 16 February 2023.
  5. The resident requested the escalation of his complaint to stage 2 on 13 March 2023. He requested an update on the repairs to the CCTV and the cause of the delay given the urgency of the repair. He said despite his report the landlord had not put any systems in place to prevent further unrestricted access. He remained concerned that the CCTV cameras were not in operation and the external bin room doors remained unlocked.
  6. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 28 April 2023. It said the cameras in the block, signage and the door entry system were useful deterrents to prevent non-residents from entering the block. The landlord assured the resident that it had reiterated to the local council the importance of ensuring that the bin room doors are left closed following their regular visits to the block. It apologised for failing to update the resident on the repairs to the CCTV cameras and for the delay in responding to the complaint. It offered £50 for the inconvenience caused.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the security of the block

  1. The landlord received reports on 8 December 2022 that the CCTV cameras in the block were not working. It instructed its external contractors to carry out the repairs. Despite several visits by the contractors between 12 December 2022 and 25 January 2023, they were unable to complete the repair. The Ombudsman notes from the evidence that the resident first enquired about the CCTV cameras through his complaint on 25 January 2023, when he found a homeless person in the bin room. In the stage 1 response dated 8 February 2023, the landlord informed him of the steps it was taking to resolve the repair and the cause of the delay. It advised him that the repairs were still outstanding, but it would enquire about the progress and update him. In response to the resident’s concerns that non-residents were able to gain access to the block, it explained that it had visited the block on 27 January 2023 and ascertained that the bin room door was secure. It said it had ensured that the relevant external organisations were contacted to check the bin room. The landlord’s records also indicate it completed repairs to the communal bin room door on 16 February and 20 March 2023 in response to reports of a damage. This is in accordance with its repair responsibilities.
  2. The resident requested the escalation of his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process on 13 March 2023. He remained dissatisfied with its response and said the doors to the bin room continued to be an access point as they were unlocked most of the time. He also complained that the landlord did not provide an update on the status of the repairs to the CCTV cameras as it had promised. The landlord apologised and explained that this had been an oversight as it was more focussed on resolving the repair. It assured him that the cameras were repaired on 16 February 2023 and had been in operation since then. The landlord said further repairs were carried out to the bin store camera on 7 March 2023. It said dirt on the camera was affecting the view at night. The Ombudsman considers the landlord’s response to be reasonable.
  3. The landlord acknowledged that there were delays in carrying out the repairs, as the contractors were unable to access the plug to the CCTV cameras. It explained that it would not normally give its external contractors keys to internal communal cupboards as access would usually be granted by its staff. The landlord said it had since learned from this and would ensure that its contractors are given early access where needed in the future. This is reasonable.
  4. The landlord also explained that its staff had visited the block on a number of occasions and confirmed that the door to the bin room was secure. We have seen from the evidence that it visited the block on 30 March 2023. It advised that measures were in place (door entry system, CCTV cameras and signage) to secure the safety of the residents in the block. It assured him that regular visits would be made to ensure the communal bin room was locked. The landlord also said it had asked the local council to ensure that they close the door to the bin room when they visit to empty the waste bins. The landlord’s response was reasonable.
  5. The landlord’s compensation states that discretionary compensation could be paid as part of a complaint resolution or due to a compensation claim where the resident has suffered a loss due to the landlord’s negligence. It further states that where multiple customers are affected by the same issue, evidence and supporting information should be provided in support of their claim for compensation. In this case, this Service has not seen evidence of a significant detriment to the resident because of the delay in completing the repairs to the communal CCTV cameras. The landlord:
    1. Apologised for any inconvenience caused due to its failure to communicate updates on the repairs to the CCTV cameras.
    2. Completed the repairs to the CCTV cameras.
    3. Carried out visits to check the communal bin room door.
  6. This Service is therefore satisfied that the landlord has offered reasonable redress in its response to the resident’s complaint about the security of the block.

Events after the landlord’s internal complaints was exhausted

  1. The resident raised further concerns on 30 May 2023 about the security of doors to the bin room.
  2. The landlord advised on 17 July 2023 that it was in negotiations with its asset team to try and make the bin store doors more secure.
  3. The landlord inspected the block on 24 October 2023.
  4. The landlord hand delivered warning letters to the residents in the block on 31 October 2023. It warned residents within the block against allowing non-residents access into the block.
  5. On 18 March 2024, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that:
    1. Its neighbourhood services manager was taking actions to tackle unauthorised access and improve security.
  6. The resident informed this Service on 20 November 2024 that the landlord had changed the doors to the bin room.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe if an extension is required. Its compensation policy states that it may award up to £250 where the resident has not suffered significant detriment but is requesting a gesture or apology from the landlord. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on time. However, it took approximately 33 working days to respond to the stage 2 complaint. According to its complaints policy it would aim to respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of receipt of the complaint. This did not comply with the timeframe of 20 working days in its complaints policy.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will provide an explanation to the complainant containing a clear timeframe if an extension is required. The resident raised the complaint on 13 March 2023 so it should have responded by 10 April 2023. The Ombudsman notes that it contacted the resident on 12 April 2023, to request the extension of the response date to 26 April 2023. It explained that it needed more time to investigate the complaint. This is reasonable, as it sought to manage the resident’s expectations, but it should have contacted him before the response became late. This would have caused the resident some frustration. Although the resident refused its request for an extension, the landlord apologised and assured him that it would respond as soon as possible. The landlord acknowledged the impact of the delay in its response and offered £50 for the inconvenience caused. This is in line with its compensation policy and this Service’s remedies guidance for low impact service failures.
  3. The landlord provided a detailed response to the issues raised by the resident in his complaints. However, it failed to respond to all the points raised in his stage 2 complaint. The resident said he was not happy with the services provided concerning the bin room doors and asked if this was included in his service charges. The landlord did not comment on this. This is not in line with the landlord’s complaint’s policy as it states that it will provide full responses to complaints. Failure to address this point would have caused the resident some frustration. It is for this reason that the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord has offered reasonable redress in its response to the resident’s concerns about the security of the block.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was evidence of service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Order

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for failures in its complaint handling.
    2. Pay the resident £50 for the failures identified in its handling of the associated complaint.

Recommendation

  1. Pay the resident the £50 previously offered if it has not yet been paid.