Irwell Valley Housing Association Limited (202340420)

Background

1. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom flat. He reported a broken bathroom light and thermostat issue in July 2023. The landlord completed repairs in August 2023 after it had rescheduled the appointment. The resident raised an issue with the hand wash basin in December 2023. The landlord completed the repair in February 2024 again after it initially rescheduled the appointment.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Scheduling repairs, including a plumbing appointment.
   2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found that:
   1. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of scheduling repairs, specifically a plumbing appointment.
   2. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Handling of scheduling repairs, specifically a rearranged plumbing appointment

4. There were failures in the landlord’s handling of repair appointments. It acknowledged this, apologised, and offered compensation that reflected the impact on the resident and put things right. It showed learning from the complaint and would improve its communication with residents from the implementation of a new housing management system. The landlord also took reasonable steps when the operative was running late for an appointment following its stage 2 response which demonstrated it had taken learning.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord responded to the complaint in line with its policy. It appropriately updated the resident when it was unable to respond within its stage 2 timeframe and gave a new time, which it adhered to.

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.

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 landlord’s repairs policy says appointments should be completed within agreed timeframes. It should only book routine repairs on working days, which excludes weekends and bank holidays.
7. The resident raised issues with the bathroom light and a “ticking” thermostat on 17 July 2023. The records are not clear, however, evidence appears to show the landlord rearranged the appointments around 3 times without agreement with the resident. Furthermore, it rearranged an appointment on a bank holiday, which was a failing by the landlord, as it didn’t act in line with its policy.
8. When the resident raised concerns about the landlords handling of scheduling the repairs, the landlord attended to the light and thermostat as emergency appointments, on 24 and 31 August 2023, as agreed with the resident. While this was appropriate and the repairs were not considerably delayed, the appointments were rebooked after the resident contacted the landlord for clarification regarding the bank holiday appointment. Furthermore, the resident made the landlord aware of the impact the rescheduling had on his work arrangements and earnings.
9. The resident reported issues with a leak to the hand wash basin in the bathroom on 4 December 2023. While we have seen no evidence of when the landlord booked the appointment or that it had communicated to the resident, the resident complained that the landlord again rescheduled the appointment at short notice. He said he couldn’t keep changing appointments due to work commitments.
10. In its stage 2 response the landlord acknowledged its failings. It confirmed it had rebooked for a joiner and plumber to attend on 9 February 2024 by 12pm, as agreed with the resident. The landlord said it had taken learning from the complaint related to its front-line repairs staff and improving its repairs communication and arrangements with residents. It also apologised and offered compensation for the time and inconvenience, including delays and poor communication.
11. This was a meaningful step to acknowledge its failures, and work to improve its services to prevent any reoccurring. The resident stated he was satisfied with the resolution offer at the time as long as the appointment scheduled for 9 February 2024 went ahead as planned.
12. The £250 compensation offer was a sufficient step to recognise the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident by the number of rescheduled appointments and the delays this caused. It is in line with the landlord’s compensation policy for failings with moderate impact and is within the suggested range for maladministration in our remedies guidance. This is an appropriate level of compensation to remedy the failings identified by the landlord and the detriment to the resident.
13. Evidence shows the joiner attended on 9 February 2024, but the plumber did not. The landlord acted reasonably as it contacted the resident when the operative was delayed and attempted a same-day attendance. While this caused inconvenience to the resident, the landlord reasonably explained that the delay was due to other jobs. The landlord communicated to the resident promptly. The landlord then appropriately rearranged for a convenient weekend appointment with the view of suitable resolution and completed the works a week later, which we find appropriate.

14. The landlord’s complaints policy mirrors our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). Its policy says it must acknowledge stage 1 and 2 complaints within 5 working days. It should respond to stage 1 within 10 working days and stage 2 within 20 working days. If it cannot meet these timeframes, it should notify the resident and provide a new timeframe.
15. The landlord acknowledged both the stage 1 and stage 2 within its policy timeframes. It responded to its stage 1 response on 8 September 2023 which was within its 10-day timeframe. It should have responded to stage 2 by 19 January 2024, however, it provided an update to the resident on 18 January 2024 with a new timeframe. It provided its stage 2 response on 24 January 2024 which was within its new timeframe. This was appropriate and in line with its policy and the Code.

Learning

Record keeping

16. We were able to make a robust decision on the evidence available, but in the future the landlord might benefit from improving its record keeping with logging evidence of its communication and appointments arrangements with residents.

Communication

17. The landlord has highlighted in its stage 2 response that it would implement new housing management system to improve its communication with residents. This is a positive approach. Additionally, we have seen the landlord improving its communication in the handling of the plumbing appointment following stage 2.