London Borough of Hackney (202404637)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202404637

London Borough of Hackney

21 July 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Repairs to the resident’s window.
   2. The complaint.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of a 1 bedroom property in a 5 storey block. Her tenancy started in April 2020.
3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 25 January 2024. She explained she had been waiting since August 2023 for it to repair her living room window. Each time she contacted it, as she never received updates, it told her something different. She said she had now had 3 different people come to her home to look at the window and it remained outstanding for 5 months. She said she wanted it to finally repair the window before any further damage occurred.
4. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 8 February 2024. It acknowledged the delay in its actions and said it had attended to the issue 3 times since August 2023. Due to miscommunication between its external contractor and follow on team, it remained unresolved. It apologised that it had not yet found a solution to resolve the issue and for the delays caused. To move the issue forward swiftly it arranged for a surveyor to attend the property on 29 February 2024 with a view to resolving the outstanding issues as quickly as possible. It also:
   1. Apologised for the inconvenience and frustration the delays caused. It said it wanted to assure her that it was actively working to address the issue.
   2. Provided a reason for the delay. In recognition of the time, trouble, and distress caused by the delay, it offered her £360 compensation for the inconvenience caused. It hoped this showed its commitment to providing her with the highest level of service and its sincere apologies for the inconvenience she experienced.
5. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord and asked to escalate her complaint on 18 March 2024. She said although it managed extremely well at stage 1, and she was optimistic that it would be close to repairing her window, it had been a month since its surveyor attended. It had not contacted her for a further appointment to repair the window. She worked and did not have time to keep calling and chasing up a repair she reported in July/August 2023.
6. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 30 May 2024. It apologised for the delay in resolving the issue. It reiterated the findings of its stage 1 response and apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and her family. It also acknowledged that the standard of service fell well below the level it expected to provide to residents. It provided an update on matters and said once its window company had surveyed her window, the frame would be ready to fit in approximate 3 to 4 weeks. It said it would continue to monitor the repair through to completion. Having considered her circumstances and the impact the issue had on her in reference to its internal compensation guidance, it awarded:
   1. £300 to reflect the level of fault in the case.
   2. £420 for the avoidable delays between 10 August 2023 and 29 May 2024.
   3. £50 for its complaint handling failure at stage 2.
7. The resident brought her concerns to us on 29 June 2024. She said that the issue remained unresolved, and she could not open her window as the one the landlord fit on 21 June 2024 had no handles to open the top window. She said it should never have closed her complaint while the repair remained outstanding, and its surveyor had no record of their subcontractor or the landlord’s appointment to replace the window.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

8. The resident told us on 9 July 2025 that the repair remained outstanding. She explained this was because the window had no handles and she had contacted the landlord about this and received no response. The landlord has provided us with images and a record of a post inspection which show that it completed the repair in June 2024. Our investigation shall focus on the events which occurred between 10 August 2023 and June 2024.

Repairs to the resident’s window

9. The landlord’s repairs policy says it aims to complete normal repairs within 21 working days. Its repairs handbook says that it is responsible for repairs or replacement of window catches, hinges, or frames. Its repairs handbook says that it may extend the timescale for certain repairs, for example if items like windows need manufacturing, and it will inform residents of this.
10. The landlord’s compensation policy says that it uses the policy to reinforce the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles of being fair, putting things right and learning from outcomes. It uses 4 tiers in awarding its compensation. The policy also says that it will consider the duration of any avoidable distress or inconvenience, the seriousness of any other unfair impact, which either mitigated or contributed to distress, inconvenience, or unfair impact. it will consider the impact on the resident’s living arrangements.
11. Through our investigation we have identified that there were failings in the landlord’s approach to the repairs to the resident’s window. There was a delay of 11 months between August 2023 and July 2024 when the landlord confirmed it had completed the repairs. There were also communication issues, as often the landlord had to chase updates internally and from its contractors to progress the works. There was also miscommunication between the contractor and the landlord. It also has not shown that it kept the resident updated around the delays.
12. The landlord recognised that there were failings in its approach. It acknowledged the delays and communication issues. It acknowledged the time and trouble the issue caused the resident. To put things right, it apologised and offered the resident compensation of £720 for its failings between 10 August 2023 and 29 May 2024. As the landlord has identified the same failings in its approach that we have identified, our role in this instance is to identify whether the redress offered is appropriate, and if there were any further failings in the landlord’s approach which it did not identify.
13. The landlord’s offer falls within tier 3 of its compensation policy. Its policy says it makes such an offer in recognition of a significant impact on a resident and also where there was a physical and/ or an emotional impact. The offer adequately reflects the fact that it repeatedly did not provide the service expected, and this had a detrimental impact on the resident due to its failure to put things right at the earliest opportunity.
14. However, there is no evidence that it had a severe long term impact on the resident. As such in our opinion the situation does not meet the criteria for a tier 4 award as outlined within the landlord’s policy. Its offer also meets the criteria of maladministration within our remedies guidance, as it acknowledges the significant and physical and/or emotional impact on the resident.
15. Following the landlord’s final response however, the repair remained outstanding. The evidence shows that it did fit a window in June 2024, however, there were further issues raised by the resident about a lack of handle. The landlord then confirmed on 11 July 2024 that it had now completed all the works at the resident’s property. The resident however told us in July 2025 that the issue remained outstanding.
16. We sought clarification from the landlord around the issue, and it evidenced to us that it installed the window on 24 June 2024 and also post inspected. It explained the workings of the window to us. It explained that the window had lifts on the bottom sash to aid in opening and closing the window, but the top did not. However this was not uncommon with newer specification windows, and the resident could still open the window from the top using the frame by pulling it down.
17. While we understand this may not have been what the resident expected, the evidence shows that the landlord did complete the required works to the window. It also explained the time frames for the works to her within the stage 2 response. As such we find that there was reasonable redress.

The complaint

18. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its policy says it will provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days, and a stage 2 response within 20 working day.
19. The landlord’s compensation policy says compensation may be appropriate for any significant breach of its complaints policy, but specifically if there is a delay in responding to a complaint at stage 1 or stage 2 without proper communication or agreement of an extension with the resident in line with its complaints policy.
20. The landlord appropriately provided its stage 1 response within the agreed timescales in its policy. Following the resident’s escalation on 18 March 2024, it advised it would provide its response within 20 working days. It then requested 2 extensions to provide its response on 17 April 2024 and 15 May 2024. It was appropriate that it kept the resident informed about the delays in its response.
21. The landlord also appropriately acknowledged the delay in its complaint response. It apologised and offered the resident compensation around the delay in its response. Its actions were in line with its complaints policy and its falls within a service failure finding. These are findings we would make where there was a minor failure by a landlord in the service it provided, and it did not appropriately acknowledge the failing or fully put it right. Based on the landlord’s appropriate actions around the delay and looking to put things right, we find that there was reasonable redress.

Determination (decision)

22. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. we find that there was reasonable redress with the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs to the resident’s window.
    2.  The complaint.

Recommendations

23. Pay the resident compensation of £770 offered across its responses if it remains outstanding.
24. There is a dispute between the landlord and resident around whether the landlord completed the works in June/ July 2024 or if they remained ongoing until July 2025. The landlord should:
    1. Review its records and speak with the resident to clarify. If it finds that the issue remained ongoing until 2025 it should consider whether further compensation is necessary between 30 May 2024 and 15 July 2025 for the delay.
    2. If it deems there was no delay, it must provide the resident with an explanation of how the window operates and attend to ensure that there are no repairs required.