East Midlands Housing Group Limited (202336363)

Background

1. The resident lives in first floor flat. The resident raised a repair for a damaged plug socket in the kitchen. She explained she took time off work to wait for an appointment set by the landlord, but the contractor did not attend.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of a plug socket repair.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. The landlord offered reasonable redress in its handling of a plug socket repair.
5. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord accepted it did not attend a scheduled appointment and did not update the resident on this. The works overall were completed within a reasonable time. The landlord fairly offered compensation via its complaint procedure to recognise the inconvenience caused and learned from its error. We are satisfied the level of compensation was reasonable to resolve the complaint satisfactorily.
7. The landlord’s complaint responses and compensation offer put right the impact of the failing on the resident.
8. There was a delay in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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.

9. The resident reported the broken plug socket to the landlord on 19 November 2023. The landlord booked a repair for 23 November 2023. The landlord accepts it failed to attend the appointment or make the resident aware it had been cancelled. Under paragraph 4.3 of the repairs policy, the landlord was required to carry out this repair at the date and time arranged by the landlord. That was a failure by the landlord. Where the landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether it resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances and offered appropriate redress. In this case, the resident’s outstanding concern is the level of compensation offered by the landlord.
10. Following the missed appointment, the landlord attended on 27 November 2023. It said it needed to order parts to complete the repair, and it arranged a further appointment. The landlord completed the works on 11 December 2023. It completed the repair within a reasonable timeframe of 16 working days from the first report. This was appropriate.
11. In its complaint responses, the landlord acknowledged the missed appointment, apologised and offered £10 compensation. This was in line with its compensation policy. It also offered a further £50 compensation as a gesture of goodwill towards the costs that the resident reported. The landlord also said it had undertaken training on record keeping and communication with residents.
12. The resident has asked for compensation for time off work and damage to the fridge and loss of food. We have not seen evidence as to the cause of the damage to the fridge. As such, there is no evidence upon which we could conclude the fridge and food were damaged by the landlord’s failure. It would not be fair in all the circumstances to order the landlord to pay for this without some documentary evidence indicating it was responsible for these costs. Similarly, we have not seen evidence to demonstrate it was necessary for the resident to lose employment income for the appointment. Our guidance on remedies explains we would not usually award loss of income for missed routine appointments, but compensation for inconvenience. The landlord did make an award in its complaint response.
13. The landlord appropriately acknowledged its failing and showed learning from the complaint. The compensation offer of £60 was reasonable in the circumstances and in line with our guidance on remedies for a failing that caused inconvenience to the resident over a short duration.

14. The landlord acknowledged and responded to the stage 1 complaint within the timescales set out by the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (2022) (the Code).
15. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint on 12 December 2023 and said it would respond within 20 working days. On 11 January 2024, the resident asked for an update on the response. The landlord then told the resident its response was due on 17 January2024.
16. There were public holidays during the complaint response period that would have impacted the response due date to account for office closures. The landlord sent its final response on 16 January 2024, which was 22 working days after its acknowledgement.
17. It was a service failing that the landlord did not provide the response in line with the Code timescales. This meant that the resident had to chase it for an update.
18. The landlord gave its response due date as 17 January 2024 and its internal communication also referred to a Christmas shut down. It is possible the landlord had further office closures that delayed its response. It should have proactively informed the resident of any likely delays to its response.
19. The delay in the response was minimal and does not appear to have significantly affected the resident. However, the landlord did not acknowledge the delay in its complaint response or offer the resident any redress for it. We have ordered £50 compensation in line with our guidance on remedies.
20. The landlord told the resident the information it needed to consider reimbursing her financial losses. Its responses showed it considered the resident’s request, and it clearly explained its decision using the evidence available to it. It signposted the resident to make a claim via her contents insurance. It is not unreasonable for landlords to refer residents to their insurer to see if they have a coverable claim.

Learning

21. The learning for the landlord is around what it should do to update residents of appointment cancellations in a timely manner.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord’s records were appropriate in this case.

Communication

23. The landlord should ensure it has systems in place to inform residents of any delays in its complaint handling process.