East Devon District Council (202500373)

Decision
Case ID	202500373
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	East Devon District Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	28 January 2026

Background

The resident lives in a bungalow. She has health issues and uses a walking frame and mobility scooter. She asked the landlord to complete multiple property repairs and raised concerns about asbestos in the shed roof and cracks in the property walls. Its handling of these issues was the subject of her complaints.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Repair requests.
2. Concerns about asbestos in the shed roof.
3. Concerns about the property structure.
4. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Repair requests.
2. Concerns about asbestos in the shed roof.
3. Concerns about the property structure.
4. Complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The resident’s repair requests

The landlord did not respond to the resident’s repair requests in line with its repairs policy. Its delays and poor communication caused the resident time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience. It recognised its poor repair handling in its final complaint response, but it did not offer the resident compensation to put things right.

Asbestos in the shed roof

The landlord took an unreasonable time to investigate and remove asbestos from the shed roof. It did not provide compensation to the resident to put right the impact of the delay on her.

The property structure

The landlord completed structural repairs to a poor standard. It inspected the property for structural defects but did not update the resident promptly causing her distress. It did not provide compensation for the impact of its poor communication and repair delays on her.

The resident’s complaint

The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaints in line with its complaint policy. It did not keep its agreements to complete outstanding repairs to resolve the complaint. It did not acknowledge its failings or offer the resident compensation to put right the time and trouble it caused her.

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 follow 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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures found in this report. The landlord must ensure: the apology is specific to the failures found in this decision, meaningful, and empathetic it has due regard to our apologies guidance	No later than 25 February 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,000 made up as follows: £300 for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused to her by the landlord’s repairs handling £300 for the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused to her by the landlord’s handling of asbestos in the shed roof £200 for the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused to her by the landlord’s handling of her concerns about the property structure £200 for the time and trouble caused to her by the landlord’s complaint handling The landlord must pay this directly to the resident and provide us with documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 25 February 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure it completes the inspection by the due date. Someone suitably qualified must complete the inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve: The landlord must ensure that the surveyor inspects the structure of the property and produces a written report with photographs. The survey report must set out: the most likely cause of the cracks in the internal and external walls, plasterwork, and window lintels whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible a full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective repair to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) the timescales to start and complete the work whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works	No later than 25 February 2026
4	Repairs order The landlord must refix the external cabling to the property and provide evidence it has completed this repair by the due date.	No later than 25 February 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend the landlord reassesses the property’s wheelchair accessibility adaptations. This should consider the resident’s occupational therapy assessment and the suitability of the internal bi-fold door.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
14 May 2024	The resident made a stage 1 complaint about the landlord’s handling of her repairs reports. She said: she reported repairs in August 2022, the landlord visited the property to assess the repairs, but it did not log or complete them it did not properly repair plasterwork so she could not redecorate the bricks and mortar had deteriorated and she had not heard back the roof tiles were misaligned and there were repointing repairs and cracks in the lintels which a surveyor recorded as urgent it had not installed a sliding door as promised which affected her health and prevented access or fast escape her brick shed leaked and had an asbestos roof which the landlord measured the previous year but she had no further contact the roof repair and repointing were high priority and caused distress
3 July 2024	The landlord sent the resident its stage 1 complaint response. It apologised for its repairs and complaint handling delays. It said it had surveyed the property on 8 May 2024 and visited her on 15 May 2024 to discuss its findings and her concerns. It said it raised works orders for plastering. It also said it requested quotes to replace the shed roof, install a sliding door, and repoint. It said it did not have an estimated completion date as it raised the orders and quotes on 15 May 2024. It apologised for not acting on its promises and said it took learning from this and would review its repairs services. It upheld her complaint.
4 February 2025	The resident escalated her complaint. She said: a surveyor needed to investigate structural issues and signs of movement there had been poor workmanship on a repair it competed 3 times that it needed to complete again it had not repaired the shed roof repairs due to access issues the plasterwork repairs were substandard so she could not decorate the landlord should replace the bedroom door as soon as possible as she had recently fallen twice blocking access to the property its wheelchair accessibility adaptations were substandard it had not resecured external cables when it repointed it should pay her compensation
6 February 2025	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint.
March – April 2025	The landlord sent the resident 2 separate holding responses. Each notice extended its stage 2 complaint reply for a further 15 working days.
21 May 2025	The landlord sent its response to the resident’s stage 2 complaint. It apologised for its delayed response to her repair requests and said: it visited the property on 10 February 2025 and needed to clear a neighbouring garden before it could repair the rotten shed roof it inspected the internal door and requested a quote for a sliding door earlier works to the porch and fireplace caused vibrations and floor to ceiling cracks to the plasterwork and ceilings it would refix the external cabling it did not replace when it repointed it could have completed repointing repairs to a higher visual standard but these were structurally sound and needed no further action it had requested a quote for the repairs and it would contact her to confirm arrangements when it received this its communication and repairs service had not met its required standards which caused her frustration and inconvenience it partially upheld the complaint about brickwork repointing and lintel repairs and apologised for inconvenience it upheld her complaints about the shed roof asbestos repair, internal door repair, poor workmanship, internal plasterwork and cabling, and its poor communication and repairs standards
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate her complaint. To put things right she said the landlord should apologise, complete all outstanding repairs to a satisfactory standard, and pay her compensation.

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 resident’s repair requests
Finding	Maladministration

What we have not investigated

The resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her health and wellbeing. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. We can consider the overall impact of the situation on the resident, but we cannot decide causation or liability for personal injury like a court can. If the resident wishes to pursue a claim she should get independent legal advice.

What we have investigated

The resident reported repairs to the landlord on 1 August 2022. It did not register or complete these repairs. She asked her local councillors to escalate the repairs on her behalf before April 2024. She did not complain to the landlord about its handling of her repairs until May 2024. This investigation looks at the landlord’s handling of the repairs from 12 months before the stage 1 complaint. The events referred to before then are for context only.
In her complaint, the resident said the landlord photographed the property in 2023 and a surveyor inspected in April 2024. The landlord’s repairs policy says it would complete routine repairs within 28 working days. It also says if it cannot complete repairs within this time it will give an estimated completion date.

Sliding door

The landlord did not replace an internal door as agreed when the resident moved in. In her May 2024 stage 1 complaint she said the door caused her difficulties due to her mobility issues. She also said the fire service thought the door caused an access issue due to the property size and layout. The landlord agreed to replace the door in its stage 1 response. It missed the opportunity to say when it would do so or reassure her the property met accessibility standards.
The landlord raised a works order to install a sliding door in September 2024, 4 months later. This was outside its repair policy target. It asked the resident to complete a minor alteration form for the door works in December 2024. This caused unnecessary repair delays considering it already agreed to replace the door as a resolution to the stage 1 complaint.
In her February 2025 complaint the resident told the landlord she said she had fallen twice and was still concerned about emergency access. The landlord’s repairs policy says it would complete repairs more quickly where they affect a resident’s mobility, sense of security, or health and safety. However, it did not do so, despite being aware of her concerns and mobility needs. The landlord had still not replaced the door when it sent its stage 2 response in May 2025. It also missed the chance to put right the impact of these failings by offering the resident compensation.

External cabling

The landlord did not refix external cabling it removed from the property when it completed brickwork repairs. It should have resecured the cabling when it finished, or post inspected the works. This caused the resident time and trouble pursuing the repair via the complaint procedure. The landlord agreed to complete the works in its final complaint response. However, it did not offer compensation for the inconvenience its poor repair handling caused her while pursuing the repair. In January 2026 the resident told us this work is outstanding.

Plasterwork

The landlord completed internal plasterwork repairs in March 2022 and April 2023. In her stage 1 complaint the resident said it had not completed the works as planned, the replastering was substandard, and she could not redecorate. The landlord replastered in June 2024. It agreed to do more replastering in its stage 1 response.
The resident escalated the repair in her stage 2 complaint. She said the plasterwork was still poor standard and she could not redecorate. The landlord’s stage 2 response acknowledged its earlier works caused plaster cracks. It said it would remove and replace plasterboard, replaster, and redecorate. Its failure to complete replastering to a reasonable standard caused the resident further time and trouble pursuing the repairs. Its offer to redecorate was fair. However, it did not offer compensation for the inconvenience its poor repair handling caused her.

Summary

The landlord reviewed its handling of the outstanding repairs in its final complaint response. It said its delays, poor communication and repair service had not met its required standards. It acknowledged this caused the resident frustration and inconvenience. It upheld her complaints about the door repair, poor workmanship, plasterwork, and cabling. It said it raised these repairs and would contact her to arrange appointments. However, it missed the opportunity to offer her compensation for the time, trouble, and inconvenience its failings caused. We found maladministration in the landlord’s repairs handling.
We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £300 compensation. This award is in line with our remedies guidance to recognise the time, trouble, and inconvenience the landlord’s repair failings caused her which it did not put right.
The landlord installed a bi-fold door instead of a sliding door after sending its final response, but the resident has told us she is still concerned about emergency access. She also told us the external cabling repair is outstanding. We have ordered the landlord to refix the cabling and recommended it contacts her about the sliding door and the property’s accessibility adaptations.

Complaint	The concerns about asbestos in the shed roof
Finding	Maladministration

The resident reported a leak from the shed roof in 2022. In her 2024 stage 1 complaint she said the landlord measured the shed roof in 2023 but she had not heard anything since. The landlord’s 2021 asbestos survey said the shed roof asbestos was low risk. However, it did not tell the resident this. It also did not complete the repair or update her on its plans to repair the roof. This was not in keeping with its repairs policy which says it completes routine repairs within 28 working days. It also says it will tell residents the completion date for a delayed repair.
In its stage 1 response the landlord said it raised a works order for a specialist to replace the shed roof. It upheld her complaint about the roof repair delays, but it missed the chance to offer her compensation for this or say when it would complete the works.
The resident escalated her complaint in February 2025, because the landlord had still not replaced the shed roof. The landlord got consent from the neighbour to enter her garden and clear access in May 2025. However, this was more than 2 years after the resident reported the issues. The landlord’s further delays increased the inconvenience it caused the resident. She said ongoing leaks damaged her garden tools and equipment, which it could have avoided.
In its final complaint response, the landlord upheld her complaint about the shed roof. It acknowledged its delays and poor communication and said it would repair the shed roof once it had cleared access. It did not refer the resident to its buildings insurance to claim for her damaged tools in line with its repairs policy. It also did not offer her compensation for the inconvenience, time, and trouble it caused her. Overall, we found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about asbestos in the shed roof.
We have ordered it to pay the resident £300 compensation in line with our remedies guidance. This recognises the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience the landlord’s poor communication and repair handling caused the resident. The resident has confirmed the landlord repaired the shed roof after it sent its stage 2 response which resolved the issue.

Complaint	The concerns about the property structure
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord inspected the brickwork and structure of the property in February 2022. It recorded the rear of the building needed repointing. The resident told her councillor the landlord surveyed in February 2024 and found the condition of the roofline, mortar, and window lintels was poor. It did not repair these items before the resident complained to the landlord in May 2024. It should have done so within 28 working days in line with its repair policy target.
In her stage 1 complaint, the resident said a surveyor visited in April 2024 and found repairs to brickwork, cracks to lintels, and mortar from the roofline were urgent. The landlord told the resident it requested a repair quote in its stage 1 response. It repointed the gable end wall of the property in July 2024. However, considering it marked the repairs as urgent it should have done so sooner in line with its repairs policy. It also should have reassured the resident there were no structural health or safety concerns.
In September 2024, the resident told her councillor she was concerned about brickwork, a hole in the roofline, crumbling mortar, and cracks in window lintels. However, she did not ask the landlord to inspect until she escalated her complaint in February 2025. The landlord’s repairs policy says it completes post work inspection if a resident is unhappy with a repair. The landlord surveyed the property 4 working days later in line with its repairs policy.
The landlord did not complete further brickwork or structural repairs. It concluded vibrations from its earlier works caused internal and external cracks. It acknowledged the lintel repairs and repointing did not meet ideal standards but these were visual defects and not structural failures. However, it did not tell the resident until it sent its stage 2 complaint response in May 2025. This delay caused her unnecessary distress about the safety of the property structure.
The landlord’s final response said the property was structurally sound and needed no further action. It encouraged the resident to report any future issues and apologised for any inconvenience. It was fair of the landlord to rely on its surveyor’s structural assessment and to ask the resident to report further concerns. It would have been better if offered compensation to put right the impact of its repair handling delays on her. Overall, we found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident concerns about the property structure. We have ordered it to pay the resident £200 compensation. This award is in line with our remedies guidance where we have found failings that caused the resident time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience which the landlord has not put right.
Since the landlord sent its final complaint response the resident told us she is concerned about more cracks, property movement, and subsidence. We have ordered the landlord to complete a structural survey of the property and to update to the resident on its finding and any repairs.

Complaint	The complaint handling
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s complaint policy says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It says it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days This is in line with our complaint handling code (the Code).
The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s stage 1 complaint. It responded 25 working days later than its complaint policy. It acknowledged her stage 2 complaint and responded 54 working days later than its policy. It told the resident it extended its stage 2 response for a further 15 working days twice without agreeing this with her. This was not in line with the Code. Its delay caused the resident time and trouble.
The landlord upheld the resident’s stage 1 complaint and said it took learning from not acting on its promises. It agreed to complete the outstanding repairs to resolve the complaint, but it did not do so. It did not recognise its complaint handling failings or reconsider what it learned from the complaint in its final response. The complaint handling failings caused the resident time and trouble pursuing the repairs. The landlord missed the opportunity to offer the resident compensation to put things right. Overall, we found maladministration in its complaint handling. We have ordered it to pay the resident £200 in line with our remedies guidance to put right the impact of its failings on her.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord did not provide us with evidence of the resident’s repair reports. It did not provide a full records of emails, repairs, and file notes of actions taken between 2023 and 2025. It should ensure it keeps clear and complete records and it can provide them when asked.

Communication

The landlord should learn from this complaint and consider how it communicates with residents. It should ensure it provides prompt, correct, and meaningful updates.