Hexagon Housing Association Limited (202423381)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202423381 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
Hexagon Housing Association Limited |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Assured Tenancy |
|
Date |
06 January 2026 |
Background
- The resident reported a repair for the carport roof. The resident told the landlord he was particularly impacted by the leak as his wife was a wheelchair user. The resident complained about the handling of the repair following delays.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
a) The resident reported that his carport roof was leaking.
b) The complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
a. The resident’s report of his carport roof that was leaking.
b. The complaint.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
- The landlord attended the repair but was unable to complete it and said the roof needed to be replaced. It re-assessed the roof and concluded it needed to be cleaned. The landlord did not properly consider the vulnerabilities within the household. It delayed in cleaning the roof, did not re-assess or repair it.
- The landlord’s stage 1 and 2 response was significantly delayed and not in compliance with its complaint policy.
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.
|
Order |
What the landlord must do |
Due date |
|
1
|
Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:
|
No later than 03 February 2026 |
|
2
|
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £650, made up as follows:
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date.
The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid. |
No later than 03 February 2026 |
|
3 |
Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to repair or replace the carport roof promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date:
|
No later than 03 February 2026 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
The landlord should consider the impact of repairs on vulnerable residents and identify these early in the repairs process. This should help to ensure prioritising cases with the biggest impact. |
|
The landlord should identify the causes of the failures to assess repairs, including its record keeping, to prevent future occurrences of this issue. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
22 September 2023 |
The resident reported that his carport roof was leaking and that he and his wife, who is a wheelchair user, were concerned about safety and slipping on the wet floor. The landlord attended within 13 days but did not complete the repair and concluded that the roof needed to be replaced. |
|
20 November 2023 |
The resident raised a stage 1 complaint to the landlord. He said he had not received an update on the repair, had chased the matter, and was told it was with the approvals team. |
|
15 January 2024 |
The landlord called the resident to acknowledge and discuss the circumstances of the complaint. The resident confirmed there had been multiple visits from contractors, but he was unclear as to what had been done. He said the roof was still leaking. |
|
14 February 2024 |
The landlord issued its stage 1 response to the complaint. Its response said the delays of the repair were due to its variation order approval process for the roof replacement. An area surveyor inspected the carport on 13 February 2024 and did not approve the request. He re-assessed the roof and recommended the roof be jet washed/swept clean to remove all moss and leaves. It should then be re–assessed to see if it still needed repair and/or to be replaced. The roof was also to be included in a future cleaning programme. It offered £100 compensation in relation to its poor communication and delay in complaint handling. |
|
14 March 2024 |
The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 as he had received no further update regarding the repairs. |
|
10 February 2025 |
The landlord sent its stage 2 response. It said the moss on the roof had been removed, the delays were due to contractors not following a robust process and leaving the matter unresolved. It had assigned a project manager to look at any outstanding works and keep the resident fully informed. It upheld the complaint and offered £200 additional compensation for uncertainty concerning the repairs and delay in complaint handling. |
|
16 September 2025 |
Resident contacted us as he was still awaiting a response to stage 2 escalation of his complaint and no progress had been made on the repair. |
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident told us that the landlord still has not repaired the carport roof. He said he has had no updates and feels nothing is being done. He wants the repair to be completed. |
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 landlord’s handling of the repair of carport |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- The resident reported a leak from the carport roof on 22 September 2023, and the landlord attended on 11 October 2023. The resident’s tenancy agreement and the landlord’s repairs policy confirm repair of external structures are the landlord’s responsibility. The initial visit did not meet the landlord’s repairs policy of attending within 5 working days of a repair being reported.
- During the 11 October 2023 repair visit, the resident was told that the roof needed to be replaced. He was not told when the repair would be completed. The landlord has not provided a report of this visit, but the roof replacement request went through an approval process. The landlord’s repairs policy states the normal repairs target for completion is 28 days. If an area surveyor is required, any works required will be authorised within 24 hours of the inspection and residents will be informed when the works will be completed by.
- Following the first repair visit, the resident was not kept informed of the status of the repair. On 15 November 2023, he chased the repair and was informed the job was awaiting approval. On 20 November 2023 the resident chased again and was informed a contractor would visit that day, but no further information was given on the purpose of the visit. On 22 November 2023, contractors visited the property to take measurements, which had already been done in October.
- The resident clearly expressed concerns around his wife’s safety as a wheelchair user. The landlord failed to properly consider the effect of any outstanding repairs on a vulnerable resident or to consider any alternative solutions while dealing with the repair.
- The landlord acknowledged that there was significant delay in the variation order being sent to its surveyors. An area surveyor inspected the carport on 13 February 2024 and suggested alternative works. The timber elements of the carport were structurally sound and instead should be jet washed and swept clean and then re-assessed. No timeframes were given for when these works would be completed by. It provided no timeframe within its stage 1 or 2 complaint responses. Although the delays were explained in the landlord’s response to stage 1, it should have book an appointment for the works.
- At stage 1 the landlord offered £100 compensation for poor communication, and the time it had taken to investigate the complaint. It did not provide a breakdown of the total compensation it offered, so it is unclear how it arrived at this amount. In its stage 2 response if offered a further £200 compensation for the subsequent delays and uncertainty concerning the repairs. The response confirms that the moss had been removed, but this had not stopped the leak. The landlord did not complete the outstanding works or keep the resident informed.
- We have found maladministration because the landlord failed to properly consider the effect of the delay in carrying out the repair and failed to take steps to complete the repair. The landlord must apologise and pay further compensation to the resident. This is to reflect the time and trouble caused to the resident in having to chase these repairs over a significant period of time, and the inconvenience caused. The compensation offered by the landlord does not reflect the adverse impact on the resident. The landlord is therefore ordered to pay the resident £500 compensation, which is inclusive of its £300 offer. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which the landlord’s complaints policy follows, requires the acknowledgement of a complaint within 5 working days. The landlord must provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days and a stage 2 response within 20 working days.
- The landlord delayed beyond 5 working days to acknowledge the stage 1 complaint. It responded at stage 1 on 14 February 2024, 3 months after the resident made this complaint. This was a significant failing and not in line with the landlord’s policy or the Code. The landlord also failed to fully respond to the resident’s complaint.
- The landlord’s handling of stage 2 of the complaint failed to meet the timescales required by the Code. The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s 14 March 2024 escalation request. Its stage 2 response was dated 10 February 2025, over 10 months after the escalation date. This delay was unacceptable. Although the delay was acknowledged and explained in the stage 2 response, the resident was not kept informed while waiting. The stage 2 response did not address the issue of the resident’s wife’s disability. The stage 2 response offered the resident an additional £200 compensation but no breakdown was provided to explain how much was for each element.
- The landlord failed to have a robust process to follow through on the actions stated in its stage 1 and stage 2 responses to make sure the repairs were completed. The landlord’s complaint handling at stage 1 and stage 2 was significantly delayed, included inadequate compensation and no follow-up to ensure the actions set out were adhered to. There was maladministration.
- The landlord must apologise for the failings in its complaint handling and pay the resident £150 compensation for additional inconvenience, time and trouble caused. This is in line with our remedies guidance for when such failures have adversely affected the resident.
Learning
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord’s record keeping was reasonable. There were issues with contractor’s record keeping, as the resident was visited multiple times for measurements of the roof, adding further delays to the repair.
Communication
Other than the specific failures outlined above, the landlord has been reasonably clear in its communication with the resident.