Clarion Housing Association Limited (202405024)

Decision
Case ID	202405024
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Clarion Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	26 February 2026

Background

The resident raised concerns about outstanding repairs and the landlord’s communication about repairs.

What the complaint is about

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Repairs.
2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found the landlord made an offer of reasonable redress which resolved its failures in its handling of:
1. Repairs.
2. The associated complaint.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of repairs

The landlord failed to follow through with several repairs identified during its 2022 inspections after a cyber-security incident caused repair jobs to be lost in its system. It did not take proactive steps to inform residents that repairs may have been affected, and the outstanding works were only picked up after the resident made a formal complaint. However, the landlord completed the repairs, acknowledged the delays, apologised, and provide reasonable compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. It also completed outstanding major works through its planned works programme, which was a reasonable approach.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

The landlord was delayed in providing its complaint responses. It acknowledged these failures and apologised and provided reasonable compensation for the time and trouble caused.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
We recommend the landlord contact the resident to gather information about the vulnerabilities of family members and then update its records.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
22 March 2023	The resident wrote to the landlord and said: Works agreed during the void period in 2010, before she moved in, had not been completed. Some repairs were completed in 2018, but the workmanship was poor. An inspection in April 2022 identified significant repair needs, but only minor repairs and a replacement bathroom window had been completed.
23 May 2023	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said: Repair jobs needed at the resident’s property had been stopped due to a cyber-security incident that affected its system. It inspected the property in May 2023, completed a mould treatment, and raised jobs to repair the loft insulation and adjust the kitchen door. It apologised and offered £550 in compensation, made up of: £450 for delays in repairs identified in April 2022. £50 for manual rent statements not being sent since July 2021. £50 for the delayed complaint response.
5 July 2023	The resident wrote to the landlord asking that her complaint be escalated. She said there were outstanding repairs not yet completed, and she wanted the property included in a planned maintenance programme for replacement of the windows and doors.
24 October 2023	The resident wrote to the landlord to say: She was pleased that most of the outstanding repairs had been completed. She did not want the complaint closed until the major planned works were completed, including: Front and back door replacement. Windows replacement. Roofing works. A possible replacement of boiler and heating system, due to age and condition. External decoration of masonry.
16 February 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It said: Works to the windows, roof, front and back door, and masonry would be completed through its planned works programme in 2024/2025. There were no planned works to replace the boiler, which had been installed 10 years earlier and recently surveyed. It offered an additional £100 in compensation for the delayed stage 2 response.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident brought her complaint to this Service as she was not happy with how long the works were taking or with the communication she received from the landlord.
2024-2025	The resident told us that the boiler broke down and was replaced in late 2024, and the major works were completed by the end of 2025.

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of repairs
Finding	Reasonable redress

The resident raised concerns about repairs dating back to 2010 and work completed in 2018. Under our Scheme, we may not investigate complaints that were not referred to the landlord within a reasonable time, which is normally within 12 months of the issue arising. As the resident raised her formal complaint in March 2023, we have considered events from March 2022 onwards. This covers what happened after the inspections in April and May 2022 through to the landlord’s final complaint response in February 2024.
The landlord’s responsive repairs and maintenance policy says it aims to complete non-emergency repairs within 28 days. Major component replacements are not treated as responsive repairs and are instead delivered through planned works programmes.
The landlord acknowledged that it failed to follow through with several responsive repairs identified during its 2022 inspections. It said that because the resident did not initially chase the outstanding repairs after the cyber-security incident, it assumed there were none. However, it was not reasonable for the landlord to rely solely on residents to identify which jobs had been lost. The landlord could have proactively informed residents that some repair orders may have been affected and asked them to report any still outstanding. After the resident made a formal complaint, the landlord picked up the repairs and completed the outstanding work.
The landlord inspected in September 2023 to see what needed to be replaced through its planned works programme. The inspection recommended replacing the front and back doors, several windows, and components of the roof and drainage system. The landlord informed the resident what works would be completed and the expected timeframe. It completed these planned works to the resident’s property, alongside works to other homes in the neighbourhood in 2025.
It was reasonable for the landlord to use its planned works programme in the way it did. This approach is commonly used by landlords to deliver major component replacements efficiently. While some elements may be in poor condition but still able to wait for planned works, other repairs require earlier attention. In this case, the landlord appropriately completed repairs that could not be delayed, such as replacing the bathroom window, while adding other items to the next planned works cycle.
The landlord apologised for the delays in completing responsive repairs between 2022 and 2023 and for its poor communication. It offered and paid £450 in compensation for this issue. In our view, this amount is reasonable to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays and poor communication.
The resident told us that she and her family members have specific vulnerabilities and that she finds it frustrating to repeat this information each time she reports a repair. The landlord showed us the vulnerability records it held on its system, which were not accurate. We have recommended that the landlord contact the resident to obtain up-to-date information about the family’s vulnerabilities and update its records accordingly.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

At the time of this complaint, the landlord’s policy said it would acknowledge complaints within 10 working days, respond at stage 1 within 20 working days and at stage 2 within 40 working days after acknowledgement.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response around 2 weeks late. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 5 July 2023, but the landlord did not respond to this request. She chased the escalation in October 2023, and the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 16 February 2024, more than 7 months after her escalation request. This was a significant delay and caused understandable frustration.
The landlord paid the resident £150 for its complaint handling failures, made up of £50 for the stage 1 delay and £100 for the stage 2 delay. This amount is reasonable and in line with our remedies guidance to recognise the time and trouble caused by delays in complaint handling.

Learning

Record keeping and communication

The landlord could strengthen its approach to managing repairs when internal system failures occur. When the cyber-security incident caused repair jobs to be lost, the landlord relied on residents to chase outstanding work rather than proactively contacting them. A more proactive check-in process would help ensure repairs are not overlooked and residents do not experience long delays.