Home Group Limited (202319327)

Background

1. The resident’s property is an upper floor flat. He raised several repairs including concerns about the structural integrity of the floor. He raised complaints due to delays in completing works and also the quality of works, which led to repeat visits. The landlord completed works to his property while considering his complaint. He referred his complaint to us as the landlord did not resolve his concerns about the timeliness and quality of repairs.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about: 
   1. The landlord’s handling of repairs in the resident’s property and the compensation offered for delays in completing works.
   2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint about the repair issues.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found that:
   1. There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs in the resident’s property and the compensation offered for delays in completing works.
   2. There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord sought to complete repairs in the resident’s property but there were delays.
5. The landlord offered compensation for the delays in responding to the resident’s complaint. However, it did not follow a clear or consistent complaint process. It changed complaint reference numbers. It also considered new repair issues during the complaint process but did not make clear which issues fell outside of his complaint and its compensation offer.

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.

6. The resident’s tenancy agreement confirms the landlord’s repair obligations. It further states it should complete urgent repairs within 7 calendar days and routine repairs within 31 calendar days.
7. The landlord’s complaint responses highlighted repairs to a door frame in the lounge, handrail for the stairs, and a leaking cistern / flush pipe. The landlord’s records indicate the resident first reported his handrail had been removed but not reinstalled on 18 May 2022. Its complaint responses indicate it took over a month to repair a leaking cistern / flush pipe after this was reported on 12 September 2022. This was over the timeframe for urgent or emergency repairs. The landlord in its stage 2 response of 26 September 2023 offered £100 compensation for the delays to handrail and cistern. It also offered £100 for a toilet flush repair. This was in line with its compensation policy at the time which allowed £100 for a single repair that fell under the Right to Repair. It is also comparable with the amount we may offer for failures, such as delays to repairs with no permanent impact under our compensation guidance.
8. The landlord also considered the resident’s complaint about repairs that he said should have been completed over 10 days from 10 February 2022. The resident listed works in the kitchen, hall, lounge, and bathroom. The landlord’s records indicate it raised repeat requests for plastering works in the kitchen, on 18 October 2021, 18 May 2022, and 12 September 2022. This indicated poor initial workmanship or inadequate preparation.
9. The resident also reported multiple defects with kitchen fittings and finishes. The landlord’s position indicate it completed repairs to a door, a gas fitting, and trunking on 18 October 2022, 10 October 2022, and 4 January 2023 respectively.
10. The records for the hallway show, amongst other repairs, a repeat issue with the stair handrail which needed to be refitted on more than one occasion during 2022. Regarding the lounge, the records show several requests and visits made for repairs to plastering, the door frame works, skirting repairs, and boxing of pipes between 2022-23.
11. Regarding the bathroom, amongst other works, the landlord carried out replastering works in November 2021. However, it fully reskimmed the bathroom again, from April 2023. This was less than 18 months later which indicates the original works were not completed to an acceptable standard. The landlord replaced the floorboards during September 2022 and October 2022. However, the resident reported in May 2023 they had lifted.
12. Taken altogether, the landlord completed multiple repairs in the kitchen, hall, lounge, and bathroom, between 2021 and 2023. This is the period pertaining to the resident’s complaint. However, the evidence indicates that it did not carry out all repairs at the earliest opportunity and that it had to revisit to complete repairs. This prolonged the time taken to satisfactorily complete the repairs. It also increased the inconvenience to the resident arising from the condition of his property and the need for multiple appointments. Furthermore, while the landlord was responsive, the resident experienced inconvenience from chasing up repairs.
13. The resident reported further repair issues to the landlord while it was dealing with his stage 2 complaint. This included new repair issues and concerns over works previously completed. The landlord’s records show that it carried out inspections on 9 March 2023, 15 August 2023 and 22 September 2023. It thereby took action to reach an informed position on repairs raised, including disputes over the quality of works. However, the landlord has not provided inspection reports from the time. It was particularly important that the landlord maintain records to support its position given the repeat repair requests.
14. At the inspection of 15 August 2023, amongst other works, the landlord agreed to complete repairs to the floor in the bathroom, landing, and living room. It agreed to complete skirting repairs and refix stair treads, risers, and newel posts. The resident had previously reported some of these works and there were snagging issues. This added to the resident’s inconvenience from delays to repairs.
15. The landlord arranged to complete all outstanding works on 1 September 2023. The inspection of 22 September 2023 noted that it had completed all jobs satisfactorily except pending works to the bathroom door frame and bedroom skirting. However, as noted, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have kept a detailed report. In fact, the resident stated it had not completed all necessary repairs, including repairs to floorboards.
16. In summary, the landlord delayed in completing repairs to the door frame in the lounge, handrail for the stairs, and a leaking cistern. It also delayed in completing repairs in kitchen, hall, lounge, and bathroom, which the resident stated should have been completed on or around 10 February 2022. The landlord also delayed in completing other repairs. The landlord did not minimise the need for follow-on and repeat works which contributed to delays.
17. The landlord offered compensation specifically for delays in repairing the lounge door frame, handrail, and cistern. It also awarded compensation for its handling of other repairs”. This included £75 for poor workmanship, inconvenience from report appointments, and the resident’s time and trouble. These aligned with the compensation policy which allowed payments up to £75 for disruption, loss of facility, and service failure. The landlordin addition offered a discretionary award of £350 in the response of 26 September 2023 for general delays and disruption to repairs. This was appropriate given the prolonged impact.
18. However, the landlord agreed to consider the resident’s claim for compensation for delays to repairs in the kitchen, hall, lounge, and bathroom within the complaint process. It did not offer compensation for these repairs specifically. There were several appointments and sets of works for each repair which the landlord did not assess individually.
19. Moreover, the landlord stated that “first time reports … will not be considered in relation to your compensation request”. However, the landlord had included these repairs within the stage 2 complaint. The resident also considered many of these works to have arisen from the repairs he had originally complained. The landlord fettered its discretion by not taking into account these works. It should have made clear what repair reports were new and could be complained about separately.
20. Therefore, the landlord’s compensation offer, while made in good faith, was not entirely clear and proportionate to the circumstances of the case. We therefore find there was maladministration by the landlord. We award the resident compensation of a further £200. This reflects £50 each for delay to repairs in the kitchen, hall, lounge, and bathroom. This takes into account the landlord’s offer of compensation, in conjunction with the number of repairs and overall length of time for completion.
21. The resident has advised us that the landlord has now completed all repairs to a good standard. Therefore, we have not made an order for the landlord to further inspect and carry out repairs.

22. The landlord’s complaint procedure at the time of the resident’s complaint state it should log complaints within 5 working days. It should send the stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days of receipt. It should send the stage 2 response within 20 working days of the request to escalate. These timeframes are in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
23. The landlord delayed in acknowledging the resident’s complaint of 14 October 2022 by 3 working days. The response of 7 December 2022 was outside the required timeframe by 4 weeks. The landlord escalated the complaint on 8 December 2022. However, it did not make prompt efforts to ascertain why he did not consider his complaint resolved. This contributed to a delay in the stage 2 response.
24. The landlord on 28 February 2023 stated it would inspect the resident’s property to resolve his first complaint at stage 2. It is appropriate that the landlord sought to identify and resolve the substantive issues. It sent a stage 2 response on 14 March 2023 which was within the timeframe of the policy and the Code. It advised it would keep the complaint open pending completion of works. However, it advised the resident he could refer his complaint to us as required by the Code.
25. The landlord offered compensation of £100 for delays in the first complaint which was about repairs. These awards are comparable to awards we would offer for the failings under our compensation guidance.
26. The Code confirms that landlords must make it easy for residents to complain. In this case, the landlord merged complaints and changed the reference number when escalating complaints. This made the complaint process less straightforward to follow for the resident.
27. Furthermore, the landlord added new repair issues raised by the resident while it was dealing with his first complaint at stage 2. It listed the repairs in the response of 26 September 2023. Allowing the complaint team to handle all repairssimplified the identification and resolution of the repair issues. It enabled oversight of the repair issues and a line of communication with the resident.
28. However, the landlord did not make clear which issues fell outside of his complaint and its compensation offer. For instance, it did not explicitly state which repairs were “first time reports”. As such, the resident lost the opportunity to make a new complaint about the handling of new repair issues reported for the first time.
29. We therefore find that there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling. For this, we award £125 compensation. This is in line with range of awards outlined in our compensation guidance for maladministration in complaint handling.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

30. As noted, clear record keeping and management is a core function of a repairs service. Our Spotlight report on knowledge and information management notes that “Good records assist housing providers to offer efficient and effective services by ensuring that decisions and actions are taken based on good quality information… If a housing provider is asked to explain what happened, and why, good records will enable it to do so. Poor quality or absent records result in the landlord being unable to answer questions, or being unable to provide evidence to support its explanation.”
31. In this case, the landlord provided sufficient information to investigate the complaint. However, it is not clear that it recorded all appointments within its repair logs. It is not clear what works were completed at certain visits. There are also no detailed records of inspections carried out. This case demonstrates the importance of record keeping, especially when a landlord is simultaneously handling a formal complaint.

Communication

32. Our Spotlight report on repairs and maintenance explains that failures can be avoided when landlords:
    1. let residents know what to expect regarding repairs and provide a clear schedule for repair visits.
    2. gather feedback from residents and conduct inspections to ensure the work is satisfactory.
33. The landlord did not consistently take the above steps. At times, the resident’s point of contact in the complaint team did not receive full or timely information to relay to the resident. The resident’s frustration and dissatisfaction may have been mitigated if the landlord had better followed the advice and recommendations in the Spotlight report.