Home Group Limited (202013927)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202013927

Home Group Limited

10 May 2022

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 a vent and the heating system at the resident’s property.
   2. The landlord’s complaints handling and its decision to apply compensation awarded during the complaints process to the resident’s rent arrears.

Background

2. The resident occupies the property, a 1-bedroom flat, under an assured tenancy agreement with the landlord, which began on 22 June 2015. At the time of the events referred to in the complaint the resident was pregnant and later gave birth.
3. In December 2020, the resident reported to the landlord that she had no heating in the property. She advised that various operatives had attended since the issue was first reported but a repair had not been completed. The resident’s social worker then made a formal complaint to the landlord on her behalf, describing the resident as homeless due to unresolved repairs. The social worker raised safeguarding concerns for the resident’s unborn child and stated that it was impossible for her to live at the property until the repairs were completed. All repairs were eventually completed on 5 May 2021. In August 2021, this Service contacted the landlord to request that it provide a final response to the resident and it provided a stage 2 response on 14 September 2021.
4. The landlord acknowledged the significant and unreasonable delay in completing the works following the resident’s complaint in December 2020. It offered her £760 compensation to reflect the delay, poor communication, poor service, missed appointments, partial loss of facilities, private plumbing costs and time and effort spent pursing the repair.
5. The landlord also informed the resident that the compensation would be offset against arrears on her rent account. The resident challenged this, stating that she had not been informed of this policy at the outset of the complaint and believed it was unfair as her rent account was currently in arrears due to a housing benefit issue. The landlord maintained that it was reasonable to apply the compensation to the resident’s rent arrears and the complaint was referred to this Service. 

Assessment and findings

Landlord’s handling of repairs

6. The resident reported an issue with an air vent and ducting system at her property in August 2020. A contractor attended but was unable to carry out an effective repair. The resident was then informed that all non-urgent repairs were on hold due to Covid-19 restrictions and that it could not reattend until February.
7. The Ombudsman has been unable to assess the landlord’s actions prior to the formal complaint raised by the social worker on 4 December 2020, as the repairs history provided to this Service is incomplete. It is understood from the correspondence between the parties that there were multiple appointments to attempt to identify and resolve the issue with the vent between August 2020 and December 2020, however, there is no evidence that the landlord was made aware of the lack of adequate heating in the property until December 2020.
8. The landlord should be able to evidence the time and date of all visits from its own operatives and contractors and retain contemporaneous notes of their observations and any works carried out. The fact that the landlord has not provided repairs information prior to the formal complaint raises concerns about its record keeping and its communication with, and management of, its contractors.
9. Notes made at the time of the complaint record that, following discussions with the resident, the landlord established that the heating system was working but that it was ineffective as cold air was penetrating through the damaged vent. The landlord did offer to provide additional, temporary heaters but the resident stated that she had purchased a heater herself. The landlord’s notes record that this was not sufficient to heat the property at night and so the resident was living with a friend.
10. The landlord did not act quickly enough following the complaint to investigate the temperature within the property and to determine whether it was habitable. This was particularly important as the resident was pregnant at the time and both she and her social worker suggested that it was not possible for her to live there. There is no evidence that any serious consideration was given to a decant.
11. Following the formal complaint, the landlord did arrange an inspection for 16 December 2020, although this was later cancelled as the resident had to attend an emergency hospital appointment. The Ombudsman acknowledges the impact that the pandemic may have had on the completion of non-routine repairs, due to the restrictions and national lockdowns that came into effect between September and December 2020. However, given the serious nature of the reported concerns and the fact that the resident was pregnant, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to treat the matter as urgent on receipt of the formal complaint.
12. The landlord did not proactively follow up to arrange another inspection appointment but after the resident chased an electrician was sent to inspect, who advised that he was not the correct contractor to complete the job The electrician suggested that the ducting needed cleaning and a job was raised accordingly, although the landlord noted that it was not sure this would resolve the issue. An appointment was arranged with a second contractor for 18 February, but the contractor could not gain access.
13. The landlord did take some steps to progress the repairs, including liaising with 2 different contractors and discussing the issue internally. Overall, the time taken to adequately investigate and diagnose the issue was excessive, which the landlord has accepted. The exact nature of the problem and the works undertaken remains unclear from the information provided and a timeframe of over 5 months to repair the vent following the formal complaint was unacceptable.
14. The landlord’s internal emails show that there was confusion as to what advice the original contractor had provided and which team should take responsibility for the repairs, which created additional delay. The landlord’s internal emails evidence a lack of clear processes for good record-keeping and management of repairs. The landlord could have been more proactive in its approach both to the management of its contractors and in its communication with the resident.
15. In its complaint responses the landlord acknowledged that the delay in identifying the problem and completing the necessary repairs was unreasonable and that its communication with the resident was poor. It also accepted the resident’s statement that she could not adequately heat the property, and this was reflected in an offer of compensation for partial loss of heating.
16. The Ombudsman considers that the offer of compensation was reasonable overall. The Ombudsman makes awards of compensation in excess of £700 only in cases of maladministration where the impact on a resident was both severe and long-term, as it was in the present case. The Ombudsman will not increase the amount of compensation offered by the landlord for the failings identified in its handling of the repairs, as this is considered fair and reasonable, particularly in light of the additional challenges the landlord faced as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Complaints handling

17. A stage 1 response to the complaint was not provided until 5 months after the complaint was raised, which is entirely unreasonable. The Ombudsman’s Complaints Handling Code makes clear at paragraph 5.5 that a landlord should not delay providing a complaint response until all outstanding repairs have been completed and should instead respond as soon as the answer to the complaint is known.
18. In the present case the landlord should have investigated whether there had been an unreasonable delay in repairing the resident’s vent and heating system between August 2020 and the date of the formal complaint. If, following investigation, the landlord concluded that some or all issues reported in the complaint were new, this should have been logged as a new repair and progress tracked. As part of the complaint investigation the landlord should also have formulated a clear action plan for resolving the ongoing issue with the vent. Failing to respond to the complaint within the landlord’s published timeframe contributed to the stalling of the repairs issue and confusion as to the nature of the problem. Had the complaint been thoroughly investigated at the time it was made and an action plan put in place, the issue may have been resolved sooner.
19. There was an unacceptable delay in the resident receiving a final complaint response, which prevented her from referring the complaint to this Service at an earlier stage. There is evidence that the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the stage 1 response in August 2021, although the resident states that she had repeatedly told the landlord that the compensation offer was insufficient. The Ombudsman is unable to establish when the resident first requested escalation, although it notes that the complaint was not escalated until the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 10 August 2021. The request for escalation made by this Service was not acknowledged until 27 August 2021, which was an unreasonable delay.
20. The resident initially requested compensation in the region of £1,500 and following the landlord’s offer of £760, indicated that she would be willing to accept £900. The resident refused the offer of £760 when she was informed that this would be offset against her rent arrears and the balance paid to her. The Ombudsman generally permits landlords to apply compensation to outstanding debts unless there is a clear reason why this would be unfair. The Ombudsman notes her comments that the arrears were due to a housing benefit error. As this has not been substantiated or corrected, the Ombudsman must accept that the account was in arrears and that it was reasonable for the landlord to apply the compensation to the debt. The resident may wish to make a new complaint to the landlord if she believes that it is responsible for any ongoing issues with her rent account.
21. The Ombudsman does, however, consider that an additional award of compensation is appropriate to reflect the landlord’s poor complaints handling, in line with this Service’s Remedies Guidance.

Determination

22. In accordance with paragraph 55(c) of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress to the resident, following this Service’s intervention, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint.
23. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders

24. Within 28 days of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £100 in recognition of the failings identified in respect of the landlord’s complaints handling.
    2. Provide this Service with evidence of the order having been complied with.

Recommendations

25. It is recommended that:
    1. If the landlord has not already arranged payment of the £760 compensation, this is re-offered to the resident on the terms previously stated.
    2. The landlord reviews its processes for communicating with its contractors about repairs and for recording appointments and details of the problem and any recommended works on its systems.
    3. The landlord clarify which team is responsible for progressing repairs when a complaint has been made.
    4. The landlord should provide training to staff involved in the handling of complaints on the requirements of paragraph 5.5 of the Complaints Handling Code and the timeframes for acknowledging and providing a substantive response.