Hyde Housing Association Limited (202337077)

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.

What we have not considered

8. The resident has raised complaint issues which have occurred since the complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure. We have no power to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the chance to put right first. There is no evidence the resident raised the complaints about damp in the kitchen or water pressure issues. Therefore, we have no power to investigate these issues.

What we have considered

9. The landlord’s website states it is responsible for structural repairs, leaks, electrical sockets, and wiring and light fittings including sealed lighting. It will complete emergency repairs within 24 hours and non-urgent repairs within 30 days. In the case of damp and mould, it will attempt to identify the cause over the phone and complete any further investigation within 14 days. It will then complete any necessary remedial works.
10. Prior to the stage 1 response, the following events occurred:
    1. The resident reported a repair to the bathroom toilet and mould on 12 July 2023, and the landlord attended on 9 August 2023.
    2. The resident reported faulty bedroom lights and an exposed wire on 19 July 2023. The landlord attended on 3 August 2023 and disconnected the bedroom socket on 8 September 2023. A further work order was raised on 11 September 2023 for faulty dining room and bedroom lights. After a no‑access appointment, the landlord attended on 25 September 2023.
    3. On 30 August 2023, the landlord raised a work order for asbestos and redecoration of the downstairs toilet. It completed work on 8 September 2023. It raised a work order on 5 October 2023 to reinstate the toilet ceiling after asbestos removal, reinstate the light, and redecorate.
    4. The resident reported a hole in the roof on 29 September 2023.
11. As the repairs involved several issues, the landlord may not be able to adhere to its response timeframes, as different trades, materials, or diagnostic steps may be required. In such cases, the landlord should manage the process effectively by coordinating the necessary teams, providing clear timeframes, and keeping the resident updated on any delays. This ensures the repair is handled in an organised and transparent manner. In this case, although the landlord took some action to resolve the repairs, it recognised it should have raised the necessary follow-on works to complete the repairs sooner.
12. The landlord set out a clear action plan in its stage 1 response and said it would erect scaffolding, commence roof works, remove asbestos in the toilet ceiling, complete a mould wash, and renew the ceiling between 10 October 2023 and 6 November 2023. However, the works were not completed in line with the agreed timeframes as additional roof works were required. It is unclear from the evidence whether the landlord should have reasonably been aware to factor the works into its action plan at the time of the stage 1 response. There was also miscommunication about when repairs would be completed, which caused confusion and resulted in the resident spending additional time chasing the matter.
13. On 7 November 2023, the resident confirmed the roof repairs were completed but the scaffolding was still in place. The delay in removing the scaffolding caused additional inconvenience to the resident, particularly as he reported difficulty using the pram. It is unclear from the repair records when the scaffolding was removed, but the resident chased the issue on 13 December 2023, so it is evident there was an unreasonable delay.
14. The resident also said the bathroom works were not a good standard. It was appropriate the landlord recognised this shortcoming in its stage 2 response. Given the extent of the repairs, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to complete a post-inspection. This would have put the onus on the landlord rather than the resident to ensure the repairs were an appropriate standard. The landlord then attended on 22 November 2023 and 28 November, as agreed in the stage 2 response, but was unable to gain access. This delay was outside of its control. It completed the stain block and redecoration on 7 December 2023 and repaired a hole in the plasterboard and toilet leak on 8 December 2023.
15. The landlord offered £700 compensation, comprised of £150 for effort, £250 for the delays completing the repairs, and £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman assesses whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
16. The repair issues were ongoing for almost 5 months. Some of the reasons for the delays, including the need for multiple contractor specialisms, the scale of the works, and no-access appointments, were outside of the landlord’s control. However, the landlord’s handling did contribute to the delays and impact on the resident, including not prioritising follow-on works, works completed to a poor standard, communication issues, and delays in removing the scaffolding.
17. The landlord should also consider individual circumstances when managing repairs. The resident repeatedly informed the landlord that the birth of his daughters was imminent, which caused urgency for the works to be completed. Although the additional distress and inconvenience is recognised, the compensation was proportionate to our remedies guidance which states such awards are appropriate in cases a failure had a significant impact on the resident. The landlord has therefore offered a reasonable level of redress.
18. The resident did not think the compensation was sufficient due to the time spent chasing repairs and use of annual leave due to missed appointments. While it is understood that the number of appointments would cause inconvenience, the resident is required to provide access to facilitate repairs with reasonable notice. As such, as set out in our remedies guidance, we do not ordinarily expect landlords to reimburse for time off work to provide repair access.

19. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (“the Code”) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. It states the landlord must acknowledge complaints within 5 working days of being received. Once acknowledged, it must respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 within 20 working days. The landlord’s complaints policy is in line with the Code.
20. The resident asked to raise a complaint on 25 September 2023, which the landlord acknowledged and asked to arrange a call to discuss on 3 October 2023. It then issued its response on 10 October 2023. There was a 1-working day delay in acknowledging the complaint, but the overall response was in a reasonable timeframe. It then responded to the stage 2 response within 20 working days.
21. The landlord offered £50 compensation for complaint handling failures. The minor delay in acknowledging the complaint did not amount to service failure, so the compensation exceeded what the Ombudsman would have awarded.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord should review its repairs record keeping ensuring it has sufficient systems to monitor repair progress and identify if follow-on work is required.

Communication

23. The landlord’s communication could have been improved by more proactively providing updates to the resident on the progress of the repairs.