Clarion Housing Association Limited (202534843)

Background

1. The resident complained to the landlord in August 2025. He said the landlord had agreed to replace his shower, but then said the shower was working and replacement was not necessary. He wanted his shower replaced as it was 30 years old.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The shower repair.
   2. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the shower repair.
4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Reasons

The landlord’s handling of the shower repair

5. The landlord’s repairs policy states it will complete routine repairs within 28 days. It says it will complete major or complex repairs within 90 days. It also says major component replacements such as bathrooms are not responsive repairs, and these items should be referred to the relevant teams to deliver through planned programmes.
6. Under the updated Decent Homes Standard, the age requirement for bathrooms and showers has been removed. Previously, bathrooms were deemed non-decent if they were over 30 years old and in a poor state of repair. Now, components only require replacement if they are broken, pose a health hazard, or are no longer fit for purpose.
7. In June 2025 the resident told the landlord his bath was unstable, and he felt at risk of falling. He said this affected his use of the shower as it was above the bath. The landlord attended on 7 July 2025 and noted the bath was incorrectly fitted. It also noted the shower should be replaced due to its age. Records show the landlord replaced the bath and shower rail in September 2025, within its 90-day complex repairs timescale and in line with the Decent Homes Standard.
8. The landlord did not dispute that the resident was wrongly told the shower would be replaced. It stated, however, that replacement of the shower was not necessary as it was in working order. Although the landlord’s overall approach was reasonable, the resident’s frustration was understandable given his expectations had been falsely raised.
9. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord apologised and offered the resident £50 compensation for its communication error. It also said it would raise the error with the relevant staff. These were appropriate steps to put things right. The landlord has therefore provided reasonable redress in its handling of the shower repair.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

10. Our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The landlord’s published complaints policy complies with the Code in respect of timescales. It says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It will then respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
11. In this case, the resident had to chase the stage 1 complaint response on 15 September 2025, and the landlord did not request a 10-working-day extension until 2 October 2025. It then issued its complaint response on 3 October 2025, which overall was a delay of 15 working days. This was a failing which caused the resident avoidable time and trouble.
12. Both the stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses recorded an incorrect date for the resident’s complaint. This was despite the resident clearly informing the landlord on 15 September 2025 that he had submitted his complaint on 22 August 2025. Accurate recording of complaint dates is essential to ensure that response timeframes are properly monitored. This failing amounts to a record‑keeping issue.
13. The resident also asked the landlord when his shower was scheduled to be replaced, but he was informed that this was a matter for the planned investment team. This was a significant concern for the resident, particularly as the shower was 30 years old. As part of its complaint investigation, the landlord missed an opportunity to provide an informed response and address this key aspect of the resident’s concerns.
14. The landlord did not offer the resident compensation for its delay and other complaint handling shortcomings, which would have been an appropriate step towards putting things right. We have therefore found maladministration in its complaint handling. The landlord is ordered to apologise to and pay the resident £100 compensation for the time and trouble he experienced. This is in line with our compensation guidance for circumstances where the landlord has failed to acknowledge its complaint handling failings and has made no attempt to put things right.
15. The landlord is also ordered to provide the resident with the current replacement schedule for his shower. It is acknowledged that planned maintenance schedules can be subject to change.

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Recommendations

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