Golding Homes Limited (202219616)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202219616

Golding Homes Limited

29 February 2024

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

1. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property.
   2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

2. The resident was an assured tenant of the landlord at the property from 27 April 2015 until November 2023. The property is a 2-bedroom house. The landlord confirmed it did not have any vulnerabilities noted for the resident. The resident lived at the property with her child.
3. The landlord started repair work in February 2022 to replace the resident’s kitchen as part of a planned kitchen upgrade. During the removal of the old kitchen, an ongoing leak was identified by the landlord, which had caused damage to the walls and floor. The landlord had commenced a drying programme and once completed, work was planned to complete the kitchen replacement, renew a missing section of damp proof membrane, plastering repairs, and the reapplying of insulation behind the cladding.
4. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 18 March 2022. The resident said she wanted to discuss with senior management repair issues and a refund of rent due to being unable to live at the property for several weeks. In response to the complaint, the landlord arranged to visit the property on 30 March 2022.
5. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at stage one of its complaint process on 9 April 2022. It said the following:
   1. It had repaired the leak in the kitchen, the contractors had now confirmed the affected area was dry and remedial work was ongoing.
   2. Once the repairs to the leak and damage had been completed, the kitchen replacement work would start on 11 April 2022 and be competed within 10 working days.
   3. In regard to the loss of pressure from the boiler, it had instructed a contractor to carry out a survey and arrange the renewal of this.
   4. It would contact the resident once the kitchen and boiler upgrade and associated remedial work had been completed.
   5. The resident was able to escalate the complaint to stage 2 if she was dissatisfied with the response.
6. Following the stage one complaint, the landlord paid the resident an interim compensation payment of £250 in April 2022. It then agreed with the resident on 31 May 2022 to pay a further amount of £2628.71 for the period of 14 February 2022 until 6 May 2022 when the resident had not been able to live at the property. This included an amount for the rent payment during this time, the resident’s expenses, compensation for a gas leak that had occurred at the property in May 2023, and £700 for the severe distress and nuisance caused. The landlord also agreed to the resident’s request to renew all internal doors at the property and the replacement of 4 radiators to resolve the complaint. Following the completion of this further work, the resident contacted the landlord to report that she had been left with a rotting wall with holes that had been filed with expanding foam. The landlord inspected the damp to the wall on 1 August 2022.
7. The resident escalated her complaint on 21 October 2022. She said the landlord had visited the property on 1 August 2022 to inspect the walls but the work was not booked to start until 31 October 2022. She said her and her son were living in a property with damp and mould. On 18 November 2022, the resident raised further repair issues with the landlord. This included a leak to the guttering which had caused damp to the lounge flooring and front bedroom. She also said the repair which had taken place in October had not been finished and furniture had been damaged by paint. The landlord arranged an inspection of the property on 21 November 2022 and noted a number of snagging issues relating to the previous work. It also noted a number of new repair issues.
8. The resident contacted this Service on 25 November 2022 and advised that she had not received a response to the escalation request. Following contact from this Service, the landlord provided the resident with its final response on 2 December 2022. It included the following:
   1. Repair work to the water leak and the kitchen replacement had been completed on 6 May 2022.
   2. The boiler had been replaced on 7 July 2022.
   3. The resident had stayed with a relative for 3 months during the time the work to the kitchen had been carried out.
   4. It had considered the resident’s request to move in June 2022 and this had been declined. The landlord had requested for this decision to be reviewed internally and the resident would be contacted with the outcome of this review.
   5. In addition to the stage one response, the landlord had agreed to renew all internal doors and 4 radiators. Following this work, the contractor and resident had reported that rotten holes had been found in some walls and filled with expanding foam. The landlord apologised for a breakdown in communications which had meant the work did not start until 31 October 2022.
   6. Following contact from the resident to express dissatisfaction about the works, the landlord had inspected the property on 21 November 2022 and had identified the following issues with the repair work that had taken place:
      1. Paint marks on the flooring trim, carpet edges, sofa, a dining chair, radiators and trunking.
      2. Some surface areas had been filled and not painted afterwards.
      3. Some areas had not been filled at all.
      4. The skirting along the part wall had not been removed. There was mould behind the skirting which required treatment as it was likely to reappear.
      5. The wall in the living room had been overboarded and decorated but the hole was still visible in the cupboard.
      6. A corner piece of trunking was missing from trunking in the living room.
      7. One of the walls made good had been left extremely rough.
      8. No wall papering had taken place due to a difficulty in getting matching batch numbers for the paper.
      9. Paint was on radiator valves in the dining room.
   7. The contractor was returning on 6 and 7 December 2022 to attend to these issues. It had also committed to using a specialist cleaning company to clean the sofa and chair.
   8. The landlord said that on a separate matter, a list of further repair work the resident had raised during the landlord’s visit to the property which did not form part of the stage one complaint had been raised with a contractor. This work included repairs to a gutter and the flooring in the dining area which may have been damaged from water ingress from the gutter, the landing light switch, a gap to the window in the front bedroom, a stair handrail which was loose, a kitchen cupboard, a cupboard in the dining room, a missing drip bar on the bottom of the kitchen door, and paper peeling in the front bedroom where the wall was not insulated. It said the contractor was contacting the resident on 6 December to arrange this.
   9. In addition to the £2878.71 offered at stage 1, the landlord offered an additional £700 compensation and a £30 voucher. This was because the resident had experienced delays to the completion of the further repair work to the damp on the walls and poor communication.
9. Following the completion of the complaint process, the resident confirmed to the landlord on 16 January 2023 that the outstanding works listed in the stage 2 response had been completed. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and the complaint was accepted by this Service for investigation in February 2023. In June 2023, the resident advised this service that part of the works listed in the stage 2 response had remained outstanding. The additional repairs referenced as a separate matter by the landlord in its final complaint response had taken place in July 2023. The resident confirmed to the Service in February 2024 that she was awaiting the outcome of a compensation offer from the landlord in relation to this further work and a decant that had taken place in July 2023. The resident moved out of the property in November 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation.

10. In accordance with the Ombudsman’s jurisdictional authority under the Scheme, and in the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues that had exhausted the landlord’s formal complaint process. The Ombudsman cannot consider the complaints about the further repair work and a decant which took place after the landlord’s final response was issued on 2 December 2022. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the investigation of this Service. The landlord had responded to further repairs identified in November 2022 within its final response as repair reports rather than as part of the formal complaint. Any further issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property.

11. The tenancy agreement states the following:
    1. The landlord is responsible for keeping in repair the structure of the building, gutters, walls, floors, ceilings, windows, internal walls, floors, doors, and skirting boards. It is also responsible to keep in repair and proper working order the installation of water heating including central heating systems.
    2. A resident must report promptly any disrepair or defect for which it is responsible.
    3. A resident must allow the landlord’s staff and contractors access at all reasonable times, and subject to reasonable notice to carry out repairs.
    4. The landlord will normally give 24 hours notice for appointments.
12. The landlord’s repairs timescales are set out in its repairs online guide. This states that emergency repairs are attended to within 24 hours, urgent repairs within 5 days and routine repairs within 28 days. It states that the landlord is committed to doing a good job and completing the repair the first time where possible. It aims to complete all repairs within 28 days.
13. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states that the landlord will ensure all maintenance and remedial works are carried out where damp and mould are caused by a building defect or disrepair. It also stated the landlord will carry out a property inspection at each property where a damp and mould report has been received and commit to carrying out any works identified in the property report it is responsible for. The case will only be signed off once both the landlord and resident are happy the situation is resolved.
14. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will work with residents to achieve an accepted resolution while ensuring a transparent, consistent and fair approach is taken when dealing with compensation. The policy states the landlord can offer compensation, financial redress for costs incurred as a result of a service failure, and goodwill gestures to acknowledge when the service received by a customer was not to the expected standard.
15. It was apparent that there was a significant delay to the completion of the kitchen replacement due to a leak which had been identified once the kitchen had been removed on 14 February 2022. The resident raised a complaint on 18 March, in which she said she wanted to speak with senior management about the outstanding repair work and a refund of rent due to being unable to live at the property for several weeks. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord took the appropriate step of visiting the property to assess the work and provided the resident with an outline of the steps it was taking to resolve the complaint on 30 March 2022.
16. In its stage 1 response on 9 April 2022, the landlord confirmed to the resident that the kitchen replacement work was able to start on 11 April 2022 and it had expected this to be completed within 10 working days. The kitchen repair work was completed on 6 May 2022. This was a further delay of 7 days. It was acknowledged that the overall delay to completing the work was inconvenient and distressing for the resident, particularly because she had moved out of the property while the work was taking place. However, the landlord was not able to have foreseen the leak, and it was appropriate for the landlord to take the steps to ensure the property was dry before the work commenced.
17. Part of the resident’s complaint included a request for compensation because she had been unable to live at the property due to the ongoing repairs to the kitchen. Evidence was not provided to this Service of the communication between the landlord and resident during the time prior to the resident’s complaint. However, it was evident from the landlord’s internal records that the landlord had not taken into consideration the property suitability or discussed the possibility of a decant with the resident at the point the kitchen work was put on hold.
18. The resident’s property did not have a functioning kitchen for 11 weeks. As a result, she had moved in with a relative on a temporary basis which had caused her distress, disruption, and also the financial detriment of additional travel costs. The landlord did not provide evidence to demonstrate that it had discussed a decant with the resident at the point the leak was detected and the work placed on hold. It also had not demonstrated that prior to the resident making a complaint, it had provided the resident with any information on its decant policy or if she had been entitled to claim for any expenses. This was a significant failure by the landlord to ensure the welfare of the resident while her home did not have a functioning kitchen.
19. The landlord had paid the resident an interim compensation payment of £250 in April 2022 for the disruption of moving into alternative accommodation. During the complaint process, the landlord agreed with the resident on 13 June 2022 to pay her further compensation of £2628.71. The landlord demonstrated in the evidence provided to this service that it had calculated this compensation based on the costs incurred to the resident during this time, the full rent payment for the 11 week period the resident had to live away from the property, compensation for a gas leak that had occurred at the property in May 2023 and included £700 for the severe distress and nuisance caused. This compensation was appropriate. It both addressed the financial detriment caused to the resident during this time, and the distress and inconvenience caused.
20. The landlord agreed on 31 May 2022 to renew all the internal doors and 4 radiators at the property. This repair work took place on 7 July 2022. These repairs were not completed within the landlord’s 28-day timescale for routine repairs. However, the landlord’s records noted that the resident had not confirmed an appointment for the landlord’s contractor to attend which had delayed the repair.
21. The resident reported on 8 July 2022 that following the completion of this work, damp had been identified to walls. The resident said that she had been left with a “wet rotting wall.” The landlord responded to the resident on the same day and advised it would arrange an inspection of the damp. The landlord’s initial response was appropriate. An inspection of the damp took place on 1 August 2022 in line with the landlord’s damp and mold policy. However, the landlord did not start the repair work until 31 October 2022. This was 115 days after the resident first reported the issue to the landlord. The landlord here had failed to attend to the repair within an appropriate timescale. The resident had to live with the damp wall for too long, and this had caused her further distress and inconvenience.
22. It was evident that the resident had chased up this repair on 26 July 2022, 16 September 2022, and 28 September 2022. As a result of the poor communication from the landlord, the resident incurred distress and the inconvenience of not knowing when the repair would take place. She also had to take the time and trouble to follow up with the landlord to find out the status of the repair work. This caused the resident further frustration with the landlord. It was noted that the landlord had acknowledged in its final response, that there had been a breakdown of communication on a number of occasions. It said that a repair had been booked for 10 August 2022 and it had missed the resident’s contact on 16 September 2022. The landlord should have taken steps to ensure that it had kept the resident updated on this repair. It had here demonstrated a poor level of customer service by not returning her communication. It also failed to follow up on the appointment it had booked on 10 August 2022. As such, it had missed the opportunity to identify sooner that the appointment did not go ahead and that the resident had not been contacted.
23. Furthermore, the landlord noted several outstanding issues to this repair work during a visit to the property on 18 November 2022. The landlord had arranged to inspect the property following the resident raising further new repair reports and concerns with the damp and mould repairs that had taken place in October 2022. Following the resident’s escalation of her complaint, the landlord said in its final response that the contractor would return to rectify the damp and mould repair work on 6 and 7 December 2022. While it is acknowledged that repairs can on occasion require additional appointments, the resident had already experienced a significant delay to the first appointment. The landlord had here failed to put things right for the resident on the first attempt and had caused her the further inconvenience of another repair appointment.
24. The timescale for the completion of the repairs to the damp walls was almost 5 months in total. The landlord had here delayed excessively in resolving the issue. This caused the resident significant inconvenience and distress as she continued to live with the outstanding repairs during this time. The landlord had acknowledged the delay to this repair and its poor communication. It its final complaint response it offered the resident a further £700 of compensation and a £30 voucher, to account for the distress and inconvenience this had caused the resident. This was appropriate and proportionate to its service failures here. It was noted that the resident had accepted this offer of compensation in February 2023.
25. The resident confirmed to this Service in June 2023 that part of the outstanding damp and mould works listed in the landlord’s stage 2 response had not been completed. This included that areas of the wall had not been filled and painted, the skirting board had only been temporarily repaired, and paint was still on the radiator valves. It was not possible to assess these repairs as outstanding because it was evident that the resident had responded to an email on 16 January 2023 and confirmed to the landlord that the works apart from the wallpaper had been completed. It was not clear if these repairs had been raised again prior to June 2023.
26. During the complaint process the resident had requested to be rehoused due to the outstanding repairs. The landlord said in its final complaint response that it was reviewing its previous decision in May 2022 to decline the request. This was an appropriate and customer focused response by the landlord in consideration of the further repair issues the resident had experienced. The landlord provided evidence to demonstrate that it had confirmed to the resident in December 2022 that she had been approved for a management move on a discretionary basis.
27. The landlord had acknowledged both the additional delays to the repair work and poor communication throughout the complaint period. It also said in its final response that its staff had undertaken intensive customer service training, and it would now be ensuring that new contractors for repairs had the skills and resources to provide good customer service. This was appropriate and demonstrated that the landlord had taken learning from its failures here.
28. In summary, the resident experienced delays in the repairs to her property, and poor communication from the landlord which caused her distress and inconvenience over a period of 11 months. She had also endured the inconvenience of having to live away from the property for 11 weeks, during which the landlord had not supported the resident with a decant. While the initial leak which had delayed the kitchen repair work could not have been foreseen, the landlord had not demonstrated that it dealt with the subsequent repair work raised in accordance with its obligations or policy. This had resulted in the resident requesting to be rehoused. However, the landlord had acknowledged its failures in its final response and in order to put things right offered compensation totalling £3578.71 plus a £30 voucher, which had been accepted by the resident. In consideration of the overall length of time the resident was inconvenienced and the level of distress caused during this time, this was considered appropriate. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for cases where the landlord’s failures have had a serious, detrimental impact on the resident.
29. Taking all the circumstances into account, the Ombudsman is satisfied that this was a reasonable amount of compensation. The Ombudsman therefore finds that, whilst there were significant service failings, the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

30. The landlord’s complaint’s resolution policy states that it operates a 2 stage complaint process. A stage 1 complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response provided within 8 working days from the date of the acknowledgement. A stage 2 complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days and responded to within 20 days from the acknowledgment of the escalation. If an extension beyond 20 working days is required to enable the landlord to respond to the complaint fully under stage 1 or an extension beyond 10 days is required at stage 2 this will be agreed with the resident.
31. The Complaint Handling Code sets out the Ombudsman’s requirements for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code also states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions. The Code states that a stage 1 response should be provided within 10 working days of the complaint and a stage 2 response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate.
32. The resident had escalated her complaint on 22 October 2022. The landlord’s internal records evidenced that it had received the escalation letter. The landlord provided its final response on 2 December 2022, following contact from this Service. This was 30 days after the escalation request was made. The resident had also not received an acknowledgement of her escalation request. This resulted in the resident having to take the time to follow up with the landlord and also seek assistance from this Service. The landlord had here failed to comply with the timescales for response set out in its complaints policy and also with the Code. This caused further inconvenience and frustration to the resident.
33. In her initial complaint, the resident said she wanted to discuss a refund of her rent due to being unable to live at her property for several weeks. While it was evident that the landlord had discussed this with the resident on 30 March 2022 and agreed on an interim compensation payment, the landlord did not respond to this point formally in its stage 1 response. The landlord’s complaint response did not address this to offer an explanation or an update. This was a failure to fully address all parts of the resident’s complaint. The landlord had here missed the opportunity to set out how it would resolve this issue for the resident and set her expectations on this. As a result, the resident spent time and trouble following up on this issue with the landlord.
34. The landlord responded to sperate repair issues within its stage 2 response. While it was noted that the issues had been raised at the same time as the landlord had carried out an inspection of the works subject to the complaint, the landlord had caused confusion by adding its plan of action on these additional works to its complaint response. It was noted that the landlord referred to this as a separate matter and confirmed it did not form part of the stage 1 response. However, by including this in the complaint response, it was confusing as to whether those issues were part its formal response. The landlord had to clarify this in a further email to the resident on 5 December 2002, in which it confirmed the additional repairs were separate from the original complaint.
35. The landlord should have been explicit in its communication that the additional repairs were a separate issue and that the resident would need to raise a further complaint if she was dissatisfied with these repairs. As such a recommendation has been made for the landlord to contact the resident to find out if it needs to consider opening a new complaint regarding these subsequent repair issues.
36. It was evident that the final stage complaint was investigated and responded to by the senior manger who had also managed the resident’s complaint from stage 1 onwards. This was not in line with the Code which states a complaint investigation is to be conducted in an impartial manner, seeking sufficient reliable information from both parties so that fair and appropriate findings and recommendations can be made. The landlord should have allocated the complaint to a member of its staff who had not been directly involved in the resident’s service delivery. As a result, the resident has not had the chance to have her complaint investigated in an impartial way.
37. The landlord attempted to resolve the substantive complaint through an offer of compensation. However, it did not acknowledge or account for any of its complaint handling failures within its final response.
38. In summary, the landlord’s complaint process did not answer all of the complaint, the stage 2 response took longer than the timescales set out in its complaints policy, and it had not been clear enough in explaining the issues it had considered during the complaints process. It had also not demonstrated that it had undertaken the investigation of the resident’s complaint in an impartial manner. Therefore, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
39. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £350 for the inconvenience, time, and trouble caused by its poor complaint handling. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies for instances of maladministration which have adversely affected a resident and where a landlord has failed to acknowledge its failings.

Determination

40. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the resident’s property.
41. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders.

42. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £350 of compensation within 4 weeks, for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures. The compensation is to be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any rent arrears.
43. The landlord to provide evidence of compliance with the above order to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendation.

44. If it has not already done so, the landlord should contact the resident to establish if a further formal complaint needs to be raised and responded to through its internal complaints process, in regard to the further repair issues raised in November 2022.