Karibu Community Homes Limited (202331435)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202331435

Karibu Community Homes Limited

30 May 2025

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

The complaint is about:
1. The local council’s response to the resident’s reports about a faulty streetlight.
2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about a faulty streetlight.
3. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the roof.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord which started in 2011. The property is a two-bedroom house. The landlord’s records show that the resident is disabled.
We previously investigated the resident’s complaint about a roof leak and defective pointing under case 202006150. We found maladministration and issued the determination on 20 October 2022. We awarded compensation and ordered the landlord to carry out full repairs to the roof and internal areas affected. The landlord provided evidence of compliance on 24 April 2023. It advised that the resident did not want decoration works to start until he was certain the leak had been resolved. We subsequently closed the case.
The following events occurred on 10 May 2023:
1. The landlord contacted the resident to find out if the repairs had resolved the leak, following some rainfall over the previous weeks.
2. It asked the resident to respond with the dates that would be suitable for the decoration works.
3. Following a visit to the resident on 3 June 2023 the decoration works were agreed for 26 July 2023.
4. The resident reported a fault with the streetlight, in the communal alleyway, to the landlord and the local council.
5. He said the light stopped working because the cables got disconnected, following construction works carried out in the alleyway by the landlord.
The local council responded to the resident on 25 June 2023. It advised that the repair had been passed to its external contractors and provided their contact details. The resident complained on the same date, that the landlord had not fully carried out the orders from our previous investigation. He also asked the landlord to resolve the communal lighting.
The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint on 7 July 2023. It said:
1. The appointment for the decoration works had been scheduled for 26 July, following confirmation that the roof works had resolved the leak.
2. The local council had advised that the streetlight was not their responsibility nor part of the street lighting for the estate.
3. Its contractors advised that no cables were visible or exposed while they carried out works in the alleyway.
4. It was not sure about who installed the streetlight and where the electricity is being supplied from.
5. Its assumption is that it was installed by a neighbouring property and powered from their own household electrical supply.
The resident raised a stage 2 complaint on 25 July 2023. He said:
1. There was a hole at the end of the capping stone to the roof, which had reoccurred after the previous repairs carried out.
2. The local council had carried out previous repairs to the streetlight, but it was unable to on this occasion, as the cable had been disconnected by the landlord.
The landlord responded to the stage 2 complaint on 21 August 2023. It said it had carried out repairs to the roof on 7 August 2023 and fully resolved the issue. It reiterated its response regarding the streetlight.
The resident advised us on 30 November 2023 that the landlord claimed to have spoken to the local council, but he remained uncertain about this because it (the local council) had previously carried out repairs to the streetlight. He said the lighting in the alleyway provided safety and security.
During our telephone call discussion with the resident on 27 May 2025 he advised that he had installed lighting at the back of the property himself as it was too dark. He said he considers the matter to be fully resolved.
The resident also advised that the repairs to the roof had been resolved.

Jurisdiction

Paragraph 42.j. of our scheme states that we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body. Part of the issues raised by the resident was that the local authority is responsible for the repairs to the streetlight. He said it had previously responded to reports made in the past, when the streetlight was not working.
This element of the resident’s complaint is outside of our jurisdiction. This is because the investigation will fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body in accordance with our scheme. We have advised the resident to contact the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) to discuss any concerns about the local council’s handling of the repairs.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

Following our determination on 20 October 2022 the resident complained about the quality of works carried out to the roof. As noted in the background section of the report, the landlord provided evidence of compliance on 24 April 2023 and we subsequently closed the case. This investigation, therefore, focusses on the events that occurred after this date. Any reference to the previous events in the report is for context only.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the faulty streetlight

The landlord’s repairs policy states that:
1. It is responsible for the structure, services and common parts of a property which it owns and manages including the roof.
2. As part of its service standards it will ensure that the needs and wishes of its vulnerable elderly and disabled residents are respected and matters relating to their safety and security taken into account.
Under the terms of the tenancy agreement the landlord agrees to take reasonable care to keep any common entrances, halls, stairways, lifts, passageways, rubbish chutes and any other common parts, including their electric lighting, in reasonable repair and fit for use by the tenant and other occupiers of and visitors to the premises.
The records provided by the landlord are limited and this has made it difficult for us to determine some of its actions. From the evidence seen the resident reported the faulty streetlight around 10 May 2023 and asked the landlord to raise the repair with the local council. The repair records provided to us do not show what actions the landlord took regarding the matter. We have seen that the resident followed this up with another report on 30 May 2023 but the actions taken were also not recorded. This was not appropriate.
While we have not seen evidence of steps taken by the landlord to investigate the repair, the resident advised in his stage 1 complaint on 25 June 2023 that the landlord’s staff had previously attended and taken pictures of the streetlight. The date this visit occurred, and any actions taken, were not recorded in the repairs log provided by the landlord.
However, the resident advised us in a telephone conversation on 3 July 2023 that the landlord and the local council were not taking responsibility for the repair. This indicates the landlord had provided some feedback to the resident regarding the repair. Failure to update its records accordingly highlights a concern with the landlord’s record keeping.
The landlord explained through its complaint responses on 7 July 2023 and 21 August 2023 that it was not responsible for the repair, and had not caused any damage whilst it carried out works in the alleyway. This was a reasonable explanation. The landlord also said it had discussed the matter with the local council, who advised they were not responsible, but we have not seen records of their communication. This does not show transparency in how the matter was dealt with.
The landlord concluded the streetlight was likely installed by a current or previous resident, and it would be their responsibility to maintain it. While this may be the case, this was not a conclusive outcome for the resident. Also, the landlord had not demonstrated it satisfied itself about the ownership of the streetlight, which was in a communal area, and who would be responsible for the repairs. According to the tenancy agreement, the landlord will take reasonable care to maintain the common parts of the premises. This was not a reasonable and proportionate response.
The landlord did not acknowledge these failings throughout the complaints process or take steps to put things right. The resident advised us on 30 November 2023 that the streetlight provided safety and security, but the issue remained unresolved. We have not been able to determine from the limited records provided by the landlord, if a safety concern was raised with the landlord. However, as the landlord was aware of the resident’s disability, it would have been prudent to discuss the impact of the faulty streetlight on him, to decide if there was any support it could provide.
Therefore, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the faulty streetlight. This was due to the landlord’s:
1. Overall communication and records management regarding the matter.
2. Failure to demonstrate it had carried out a thorough investigation into the ownership and responsibility of the repairs to the streetlight.
3. Failure to demonstrate it had discussed the impact of the faulty streetlight on the vulnerable resident, to determine if any support could be provided.
Due to above, we have awarded compensation in the amount of £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. While the resident advised that the issue is now resolved, the ownership and maintenance of the original light remains unresolved.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the roof

The landlord’s repair and maintenance policy says that it will complete repairs within 24 hours if it is an emergency and complete all non-emergency repair requests within an average of twenty working days.
From the evidence seen, the resident reported a damage to the end tiles to the roof through his stage 2 complaint on 25 July 2023. He said there was a hole at the end of the capping stone, which needed to be repaired. The repair records provided contain limited information about this issue and does not clearly set out the actions taken by the landlord.
While the evidence indicates the resident raised the repair through the stage 2 complaint, we expect the landlord to have updated its repair records to include:
1. The date the repair was reported and appointments.
2. Dates of visit to the property.
3. Details of works carried out.
It is a fundamental part of providing a good repairs service to keep an accurate record of repairs. The landlord has not demonstrated that it updated its records accordingly in this case. This is not appropriate.
The landlord advised in its stage 2 response on 21 August 2023 that it returned and completed the repair on 7 August 2023. Based on its response, this was attended within 10 working days, a reasonable timeframe, but we have not been able to confirm this from its repair records. Following our conversation with the resident on 27 May 2025, he advised us that the repair had been satisfactorily completed and he had no further concerns.
However, we have found service failure due to the failure identified in the landlord’s repair records management. We have made an order to address this.

Determination

The local council’s response to the resident’s reports about the faulty streetlight is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the faulty streetlight.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the roof.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord should carry out the following orders:
1. Pay the resident £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the repairs to the streetlight.
2. Any compensation awarded should be paid directly to the resident.
Within 12 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Contact the local council to discuss and clarify concerns expressed by the resident, that it had previously taken responsibility for the repairs and establish what had changed. The outcome of the discussion should be documented and a copy provided to us.
2. If the issue remains unresolved the landlord should write to neighbouring properties to find if any of them had installed the streetlamp.
3. Based on the outcome, it should determine who would be responsible for the repairs and maintenance. The outcome of this investigation should be documented and a copy shared with the resident and this Service.
4. Carry out a review of its repairs record keeping in this case. It should identify any learning and measures it will implement to ensure it maintains accurate record of repairs in the future.