London Borough of Lambeth (202336797)

Background

1. The resident lives on the third floor in a block of flats with her partner and 3 children. She reported the window in her eldest child’s bedroom was unsafe after half the frame came out when her son tried to open it. She said the same issue happened in 2021, which the landlord repaired in 2022.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Window repair.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repair.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repair

4. The landlord did not complete the repair in line with its policy timescales. Its record keeping and communication was poor. It did not keep the resident updated.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

5. There was a delay in the landlord sending its stage 1 complaint response.

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.

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.

What we did not investigate

6. The resident said the outstanding repair had a detrimental impact on her and her family’s health and wellbeing. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
7. As part of her complaint, the resident said the landlord did not fix her window properly following her report in 2021 because the same window failed again in 2023. The resident did not raise a complaint about the previous repair until October 2023. This investigation focuses on the 2023 window repair, and we have not investigated the previous repair.

What we did investigate

8. The landlord attended the resident’s property on 16 February 2023. However, the landlord did not send us any details about this visit, or the resident’s initial repair report.
9. The landlord said it raised initial work orders incorrectly. This was likely to have caused a delay. Its contractor attended on 20 April 2023, but it did not provide details of what work it did or raised. It completed a survey on 8 June 2023 but other than 2 photos of the window during this survey, it did not provide any further information. It raised an order for follow on work on 30 August 2023, but its records do not confirm what it was for.
10. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord arranged for its contractor to visit on 27 October 2023. Due to an administration error the visit did not happen, and it failed to inform the resident. This was likely to have caused the resident time and trouble waiting.
11. In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord said its contractor attended on 11 December 2023 and hoped it resolved the issue. As part of her complaint escalation, the resident said the contractor did not attend. The landlord told us it could not find any record of the visit.
12. Following the resident’s complaint escalation, the landlord arranged a visit on 5 January 2024. It said no one answered when it attended. However, it did not confirm this appointment with her.
13. As part of its stage 2 complaint resolution, the contractor attended on 1 February 2024 and found the window mechanism was damaged. It returned on 15 February 2024, completed the window repair and said it left it in good working order. After this repair, the resident contacted the landlord because the window did not tilt or turn anymore. Its contractor attended again on 24 May 2024 and resolved the issue.
14. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repair was poor. It failed to complete the repair in line with its 90-day policy timescale for planned repairs. This was likely to have caused distress to the resident who was concerned for her and her family’s safety, particularly as it was her child’s bedroom window in a high-level flat.
15. There were also significant gaps in the landlord’s repair records. It did not send details of the initial report from the resident, its visit in February and December 2023 or the work its contractor did in April and August 2023. It also did not provide copies of its survey from June 2023 and February 2024. This is poor record keeping.
16. The landlord’s communication was also poor. It did not keep the resident updated about the repair, which caused her time and trouble complaining. It also failed to inform her of the cancelled appointment in October 2023 and the re-arranged appointment in January 2024.
17. In view of this, we found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repair. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £500 compensation. This is in keeping with our remedies guidance for failings which adversely affected the resident.

18. The landlord had a 2-stage complaints policy. It said it would acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 2 working days and respond within 20 working days. At stage 2, it said it would acknowledge complaints within 2 working days and respond within 25 working days. This was not in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) in use at the time. We have assessed the landlord’s complaint handling against the Code which was applicable at the time (2023).
19. The landlord sent its stage 1 response 46 working days after the resident’s complaint.  This delay far exceeded its policy timescale and the timescales in the Code, which said landlords must respond to the complaint within 10 working days.
20. The landlord sent its stage 2 response 23 working days after the resident’s escalation request. This was not compliant with the Code, which said landlords must respond within 20 working days of the complaint escalation unless it agreed an extension. However, while the 3 working day delay was unlikely to have any significant impact to the resident, its response was poor. It did not address the issue she raised in her complaint escalation about its appointment on 11 December 2023. This caused the resident further time and trouble complaining to us.
21. Due to the above failings, we found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation. This is in line with our remedies guidance for service failures which the landlord did not acknowledge or put right and caused the resident time and trouble.
22. We have not ordered the landlord to review its complaints policy because its updated policy is compliant with our current Code.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. The landlord’s repair records were poor. The landlord should make sure its repair records are accurate and complete.

Communication

24. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor. It should consider how it can improve its communication with residents for repair and survey updates. It should also consider how it communicates with contractors to ensure it is aware of when it attended and the work completed.