London Borough of Islington (202326139)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202326139

Islington Council

12 June 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 the resident’s reports of repairs to an internal wall and the plastering.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The tenancy began in May 2022. The resident lives in the property with her children, 2 of the resident’s children have additional needs. 
3. The landlord’s records show that the resident first reported her concerns in September 2022. The resident reported that the wall between her living room and the stairs was bowing, and the plaster was crumbling and falling off. The landlord inspected the wall on 23 September 2022 and referred the works to its contractor.
4. A works order was raised on 21 February 2023. The landlord inspected the wall on 13 April 2023, it found that a structural survey was needed before remedial work could be carried out. The landlord’s Surveyor attended on 20 July 2023. It was noted that the damage to the wall was due to wear and tear of the plastering, and there was no structural concerns. The landlord’s contractor was instructed to recommence the repair work on 17 August 2023.
5. The resident first complained to the landlord on 15 September 2023, the resident reported that the repairs had not been completed and the plaster continued to crumble. The landlord responded on 4 October 2023, it apologised that its contractor had not yet completed the work. It offered the resident £250 compensation for the delay in commencing the plastering work.
6. The resident escalated her complaint on 9 October 2023 because the repairs had not been completed and she had not received contact from the landlord or its contractor to arrange the work. The resident noted that both of her children were disabled, and 1 child kept attempting to eat the falling plaster. 
7. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 31 October 2023. It apologised for its poor communication and the time taken to complete the repairs. It increased its compensation offer to £808.24, this was broken down as:
   1. £25 for its late stage 1 complaint response.
   2. £583.24 for the delay in completing the works.
   3. £100 for time and trouble.
   4. £100 for distress and inconvenience.
8. The resident escalated her complaint to us on 31 October 2023 because she remained unhappy that the works had not been completed. The landlord’s repair logs show that the work was completed on 22 March 2024.

Assessment and findings

9. The resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of repairs to an internal wall, the wall was bowing which caused the plaster to crumble and fall off. The landlord’s records show it classified the resident’s repair as routine. Its repair policy states that routine repairs will be completed within 20 working days.
10. The landlord has acknowledged that the resident first reported her concerns about the wall on 20 September 2022. While it initially attended within 3 working days, there was a delay of 106 working days before the works were raised with the appropriate contractor, and a further 174 working days until the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response. Given that the works had not been completed at the time of the stage 2 response, the works took place significantly outside of the landlord’s advertised time frames.
11. While not meeting a policy timeframe is not necessarily a failing in itself, we would expect to see evidence that the resident was being kept up to date with the progress of the repair and the reasons for any delays. We understand that some repairs can be complex and require several visits, the landlord is expected to manage the resident’s expectations and provide assurances that it is taking the repair seriously. This has not been the resident’s experience in this case. The lack of updates ultimately led to the resident making her complaint.
12. We acknowledge that the landlord needed to appoint a Structural Surveyor to inspect the wall before it could complete the repairs, this would have delayed the repairs and was outside the landlord’s control. The records suggest that it took 3 months for the landlord to contact the Structural Surveyor which was inappropriate. Additionally, the records show that the Structural Surveyor cleared the landlord to carry out the remedial works in August 2023 which was several months before work was actually completed. The landlord failed to engage effectively with its contractors to prevent further delay and ensure that the repair was carried out as soon as possible.
13. The resident was evidently distressed by the condition of the property. In her complaint escalation she expressed frustration that she had not received an update on the works and that her home did not feel safe. Additionally, the resident advised that one of her children is disabled and would attempt to eat the plaster that had fallen, and her other child is autistic and was upset at the disorganisation of the home.
14. Overall, the landlord took too long to complete the repair to the resident’s wall. It did not provide meaningful updates and there were delays in the work being allocated. The resident was inconvenienced by not knowing when the repair would be completed and was distressed by the impact on her children.
15. In its complaint responses, the landlord accepted that it had taken too long to complete the repair. It was candid about its delay in referring the matter to its surveyor and provided information to assure the resident that there was no structural concerns with her property. The landlord offered the resident compensation of £808.24.
16. We consider that this response and compensation offer is a reasonable redress to the failures identified. While the offer was made on the basis that the work would be completed in December 2023, rather than March 2024, the offer amount still falls in line with our remedies guidance where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident. The determination of reasonable redress is made on the understanding that the compensation offered of £808.24 for its handling of the resident’s report of repairs to the internal wall and plastering is paid to the resident, if it has not already been paid.

Determination

17. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was a reasonable offer of redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the internal wall and plastering.

Recommendations

18. The landlord should pay the resident its compensation offer of £808.24, if it has not already done so.