Clarion Housing Association Limited (202200310)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202200310

Clarion Housing Association Limited

30 September 2022

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 request for a bathroom replacement.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
3. Although there is no evidence for this, the resident has explained that his concerns regarding his bathroom renewal dated back to 2018, when he first moved in. The resident explained that a property survey took place in 2021 and he was advised that the bathroom was dated and needed upgrading, but the landlord found that, although the bathroom was old, it was functioning as designed and still meeting requirements.
4. The resident complained on 20 January 2022. He explained that he had a number of visits from staff who he said had told him his bathroom needing replacing, yet there was lack of action and communication by the landlord in doing so. He also had concerns about the size of the bath and its condition, saying that it had paintwork coming off.
5. The landlord maintained its position in both of its complaint responses. It acknowledged that the bathroom was old, but it was working and functioning how it was supposed to. It also advised that a review of the property condition was due to take place within the 2022/2033 financial year, and explained that, if the property was eligible, required works will take place as part of a scheduled planned investment programme within 2023/2024.
6. The resident brought his complaint to this Service maintaining that he had been told when he started his tenancy that the bathroom would be replaced. He disagreed with the landlord’s position that the bathroom was in an acceptable condition, especially the bath.

Assessment and findings

7. The focus of the resident’s complaint was that he said he was told by the landlord, when he started his tenancy and again later, that the bathroom would be renovated or renewed within a relatively short timeframe. He argued that it was in an old and poor condition, did not meet relevant standards, and required renewal. The landlord appropriately inspected the bathroom, and concluded that while it was indeed old, it was still of an acceptable condition, and it would not replace it at the time sought by the resident. Landlords do have a responsibility to maintain their properties in a reasonable standard (see for example the decent home guidance), and this usually means they will renew or replace certain parts of a property, such as a bathroom, every 20 to 30 years. The decision when to do so is for the landlord to make, which they often do as part of their programmed schedules of major works. No evidence has been provided showing that the landlord intended to renew the bathroom in the timeframe the resident believed, or that it is not of an appropriate technical standard. The evidence of the landlord’s operatives’ inspections supports the landlord’s decision and explanations to the resident, which were therefore reasonable and in line with its obligations and responsibilities. 
8. In his escalation complaint, the resident repeated his belief that a new bathroom was due, and had been promised. He also raised concerns about the bath being too small for his needs. He explained he has a health condition, which meant he needed to use the bath to help with his regular treatments, but it was too shallow to easily let him do so. The landlord did not respond to this specific point, but repeated its view that the bathroom, and the bath, were of a suitable condition and standard. In the circumstances, that was a reasonable position because changing the bath would have been considered an “improvement” (making something better) rather than a necessary repair or replacement. Making an improvement is at the landlord’s discretion. In certain situations, residents can support their request for health-based physical adaptations to their home by obtaining information from an Occupational Therapist, or a disabled facilities grant from the relevant local authority. Nothing in the evidence indicates the resident did this in order for the landlord to reconsider its position. It might have been useful for the landlord to signpost the resident to that possibility, but such information is freely available to all through various sources. This is something both parties may like to consider going forward.
9. In its complaint responses the landlord explained that the resident’s property would be included in a future survey in 2022/2023 to assess its suitability for renewal in subsequent programmes of works in 2022/2024. That showed that while the property was not suitable at the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord does not intend to never update the bathroom, and that its work to do so should not be too far in the future. In light of the resident’s specific requirements for the bathroom, it would be good customer service for the landlord to work with him to identify and consider whether they can be accommodated within the scope of the planned works.

Determination

10. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the complaint.