London Borough of Hounslow (202229883)

Decision
Case ID	202229883
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Hounslow
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	8 December 2025

Background

The resident reported that her porch roof and garden shed were leaking and that while the landlord had agreed to repair her front door step, this remained outstanding. She subsequently made a complaint to the landlord as she was unhappy with its response to her reports.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reported repairs.
We have also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We have found:
1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reported repairs.
2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord failed to progress and resolve the resident’s reported repairs within a reasonable timeframe. While the landlord appropriately acknowledged this, its compensation did not go far enough to put matters right.
The landlord failed to reasonably ensure that it fully reviewed its stage 1 response when the resident escalated her complaint.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 15 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £350 made up as follows: £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of her reported repairs. £100 for its complaint handling failing. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 15 January 2026
3	Action Order The landlord must contact the resident to: discuss whether she has any outstanding concerns about her reported repairs, including the redecoration of the paint splashed area. If she does, it should arrange to investigate and resolve any outstanding issues within a reasonable timeframe. If further works are required, it should also consider whether any additional compensation from the date of this determination to the date of completion of the works is warranted. ascertain whether she would like to make a claim for her damaged belongings and provide its insurers details if required. The landlord should pay the resident the compensation it offered in its complaint responses if it has not already done so.	No later than 15 January 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord may wish to remind staff to ensure that all aspects of a resident’s complaint are responded to at stage 2 where appropriate.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
April 2023	The resident told the landlord that although repairs to the garden shed were completed, water was still leaking into it.
22 June 2023	Following the resident’s report that her front doorstep tiles were cracked, the landlord removed the tiles and replaced them with anti-slip black paint.
July 2023	The landlord inspected the garden shed and noted that the roof was incorrectly installed and needed to be refixed.
September – October 2023	The landlord noted that the resident reported that the front doorstep repair was outstanding.
6 November 2023	Following the resident’s report that her porch roof was leaking, the landlord repaired it.
4 December 2023	The resident made a formal complaint. She said: the paint that the landlord had used to repair her front doorstep was not waterproof. When stepped in, the paint would transfer onto her flooring which had damaged it and made the matter worse. she had reported the issue, but the landlord had not resolved it. the porch roof had also leaked which caused puddles to form on the doorstep.
12 December 2023	The landlord attended to carry out works to the shed, but works did not go ahead due to a neighbour complaint. The landlord also called the resident to discuss her complaint. It noted that she said that the porch roof was leaking and the doorstep and shed works remained outstanding. It raised an order to carry out repairs to the doorstep.
4 January 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said: it had taken too long to action the works to the shed roof and front doorstep. It would carry out the repairs to the shed on 28 February 2024 and repairs to the front doorstep and redecorate the area damaged by paint splash on 6 February 2024. It repaired the porch roof on 6 November 2023.
7 February 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She said that she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She explained that some of the works had not been started and/or completed.
7 March 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said: it had difficulty sourcing the original tiles for the doorstep. it would install replacement tiles on 14 March 2024 and complete the shed works on 30 April 2024. there had been delays to the shed roof and front doorstep and offered £100 compensation.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to us and told us that the repairs remained outstanding.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reported doorstep and garden shed repairs
Finding	Maladministration

Front doorstep

When the resident reported that the doorstep works remained outstanding in September 2023, the landlord’s records show that it closed the case without any follow up. It noted that the work was already completed in June 2023. Given that the resident reported an issue after it repaired the step, it would have been reasonable for it to have sought further clarification on the matter. As it did not, it may have missed an opportunity to proactively and reasonably resolve the resident’s concerns at that time.
The landlord failed to raise a work order when the resident told it that the repairs to the doorstep remained outstanding in October 2023. There no evidence that it reasonably looked into the matter when she told it that she had not received an appointment date for the repair in early November 2023. In addition, there is no evidence to demonstrate that it responded to her queries during this time either. The landlord’s lack of action was unreasonable which caused the resident distress and inconvenience. It is noted that the landlord raised orders for other repairs to be carried out on 11 and 12 December 2023. The evidence suggests that due to record keeping and communication issues it failed to include the resident’s concerns about the doorstep.
The landlord’s records show that the doorstep repair was raised in December 2023. The reason for the 2-month delay is unclear. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the delay was unavoidable. It is noted that the repair was subsequently completed in March 2024. This was a departure from the timescales as set out in the repairs policy and was the cause of distress and inconvenience to the resident.

Porch roof

The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s concerns about the porch roof at stage 2 of the complaints process, and it should reasonably have done so. Given the complaint-handling failure, we have investigated the resident’s concerns accordingly
The landlord noted that the resident told it in early December 2023 that the porch roof was leaking. The landlord failed to investigate the resident’s report. The reason that it did not do so is unclear. Nonetheless, that it did not was a failing. This meant that it could not satisfy itself that it reasonably resolved the resident’s complaint.

Shed roof

The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s report that the shed roof was leaking in a timely manner. It took 3 months to complete the inspection and we have seen no evidence that this was unavoidable.
Following its July 2023 inspection, the landlord noted that further works were required to the shed roof. It is unclear what transpired over the following months. Nonetheless, it was not until 12 December 2023 that it attended to repair it.
It is noted that the intended works to the shed on 12 December 2023 were rearranged to 28 February 2024 due to a neighbour complaint when the operatives were onsite. The landlord notified the resident of the new appointment date in its stage 1 response. However, the evidence available shows that the appointment did not go ahead. While the reason it did not is unclear, this further failing would have exacerbated the resident’s distress and inconvenience as the works continued to go unresolved. In particular as at this point the repair remained outstanding for approximately 10 months.

Conclusion

It is acknowledged that the landlord offered the resident £100 compensation in recognition of its delays to progress and resolve the reported repairs. However, taking into consideration the length of the delays and the additional failings that we have identified, the level of award was not proportionate nor did it go far enough to put matters right. In particular, as there evidence that suggests some repairs remain outstanding. Therefore, in line with our Remedies Guidance we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £250 compensation. This should replace the original award. The landlord may deduct any payments it has already paid from this award. Further orders have also been made aimed to resolve any outstanding issues.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord’s complaint responses were in line with that of its policy and our Code.
However, as previously highlighted, the landlord missed an opportunity to ensure that it fully addressed the resident’s complaint about her porch roof within its internal complaint process. This meant that the resident’s concerns went unaddressed which caused her distress and inconvenience. Therefore, we have found that there was a service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. In line with our Remedies Guidance, we have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping) and Communication

The evidence suggests that the landlord’s poor record keeping, and communication practices contributed to its failings in this case. Therefore, the landlord may wish to carry out a review into the matter.