Community Gateway Association Limited (202325167)

Background

1. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom house under an assured tenancy. She complained about the landlord’s handling of anti-social behaviour (ASB), staff conduct between 2017 and 2022, and delays in communication and action regarding repairs. She reported having mobility issues and said these matters have significantly affected her mental health.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. ASB and staff conduct.
   2. Repairs.
   3. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found that:
   1. The ASB and staff conduct issues are outside of our jurisdiction.
   2. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs.
   3. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

ASB and staff conduct

4. The resident did not raise the ASB, and staff conduct issues to the landlord within a reasonable time. The resident made subsequent reports of ASB after the landlord sent its stage 2 response.

Repairs

5. The landlord did not follow up with the resident about roof repairs initially. It acknowledged this is in its stage 2 response, but did not offer adequate redress.

Complaint handling

6. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint within the required timescales.

Putting things right

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.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

7. The staff conduct issues raised by the resident relate to the handling of her ASB reports by specific staff members. As such, we have looked at these issues together.
8. The resident said the landlord failed to respond to ASB reports dating back to 2010. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord confirmed that it investigated issues from 2017 to 2021. A previous Ombudsman decision issued in February 2022 found that reports from 2010 to early 2019 were outside the timeframe for consideration. That decision found no fault in the landlord’s handling of ASB reports between February and September 2019 but did identify failings in how the landlord managed the associated complaint.
9. Our scheme rules state we may not investigate issues which the resident did not refer to the landlord as a complaint within a reasonable time, which is normally 12 months. The resident’s complaint was about ASB issues between 2019 and 2021, and staff conduct issues between 2019 and July 2022. We have already considered the complaints between 2010 and 2019. The resident raised a formal complaint on 15 December 2023.
10. There is no evidence to show the resident raised a complaint promptly and in any event within 12 months of when they became aware of the issue. We have not seen evidence the landlord prevented the resident from raising a complaint sooner, other than those addressed during our previous investigation. For that reason, we will not investigate the complaint about ASB, and staff conduct.
11. The resident has reported new incidents of ASB from her neighbour after the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. As these events occurred afterward, they fall outside the scope of the current investigation. The resident would need to raise a new formal complaint with the landlord and follow its complaints process.

12. On 18 September 2023, the resident called about roof repairs she had been waiting for since December 2022. However, the landlord’s records do not show that it scheduled roof repairs in December 2022. We are unable to confirm whether the landlord committed to making these repairs.
13. On 22 September 2023, the landlord raised a job to repair roof tiles and called the resident to confirm. During the call, the resident asked the landlord not to send anyone and ended the call abruptly. The landlord cancelled the job but did not follow up. Given the nature of the call, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to send an email or letter to confirm whether the resident still wanted the repair to proceed.
14. The resident called again on 25 September 2023. The landlord did not act until 3 October, when it booked an inspection. It took no action following this. It booked another repair on 14 November after the resident called again. The landlord’s repairs policy says it should complete routine repairs within 20 working days. The delay was unreasonable as the landlord did not meet the 20-day repair timeframe.
15. The landlord did not provide its stage 1 response to us, so it is unclear what actions it promised to take. In its stage 2 response, it said it inspected the property but did not follow up on the works needed. This is not inline with its repairs policy.
16. The landlord contacted the resident on 23 November 2023, asking if the roof issue had gotten worse since the previous visit. The resident raised potential health and safety concerns about the roof in response.
17. The landlord inspected the property on 24 November 2023 and identified roof repairs were needed due to missing tiles and a small hole in the felt. A roofer confirmed the roof was safe. The landlord promptly booked the repair for 14 December 2023, as confirmed in its stage 2 response. Its actions were reasonable, responding quickly to the resident’s health and safety concern and ensuring the repair was completed as planned.
18. The landlord identified several issues needing attention: kitchen units, loft insulation top-up, a missing brick in the front wall, and repointing at the rear of the property. It agreed to carry out repairs one at a time, respecting the resident’s preference. It arranged for a Tenancy Management Team Leader to attend internal repair appointments. Kitchen unit repairs were scheduled first, and repointing was added to the planned works for 2024/25. This approach was reasonable and resident-focused.
19. After the stage 2 response, the resident declined the kitchen unit replacement and loft insulation top-up. The landlord raised a job to replace the missing brick in January 2024, continuing with the agreed repair plan.
20. The landlord failed to complete roof repairs within the required timeframe in September 2023, causing a two-month delay. The resident had to chase for action, and the landlord did not acknowledge the distress caused. While the landlord failed to take action, there is no evidence to show that roof issues had a significant impact on the resident.
21. We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs. Our remedies guidance suggests compensation of up to £100 when we find service failure. As a result, we have ordered the landlord to provide £100 compensation and a written apology.
22. The resident reported further issues after the landlord’s stage 2 response, including a broken bollard and additional roof work. These fall outside the scope of the current investigation. However, we have recommended that the landlord conduct a survey to identify outstanding repairs and provide a schedule for completion.

23. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it must acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 2 working days and respond within 10 working days. For stage 2 complaints, it must acknowledge within 3 working days and respond within 10 working days. If more time is needed, the landlord must inform the resident and explain the reason for the delay.
24. The resident raised a complaint about repairs on 20 September 2023. The landlord acknowledged this on 22 September 2023, which was within the required timeframe. While the landlord referred to its stage 1 response in its stage 2 reply, it did not provide a copy of the stage 1 response to us. Therefore, it is unclear whether the response was issued within the 10-working-day deadline.
25. The landlord sent all other complaint responses on time or contacted the resident to confirm it needed an extension. Based on the available evidence, we have not identified maladministration in the landlord’s handling of this complaint.

Learning

26. The landlord did not consistently follow up on repairs. The landlord ensure that it follows through on agreed actions, so residents do not have to chase updates.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

27. The landlord did not provide a copy of its stage 1 complaint response to us. This limited our ability to assess whether it met its complaint handling obligations. The landlord should ensure that it retains and shares all relevant complaint correspondence with the Ombudsman to support future investigations.