London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202107410)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202107410

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

10 October 2022

 

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. The resident’s reports of repair issues to her windows.
    2. The formal complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
  2. The resident initially reported that the bedroom window frame was rotten on 25 February 2019. The landlord then arranged for a repair, but the resident refused as she wanted the windows to be replaced.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 22 March 2021 as she said the windows were still in poor condition, despite the temporary repairs that had been completed. In her complaint escalation, she said that that the window frames were not fit for purpose and a contractor had advised that the windows needed to be upgraded, so she did not want any further repairs to take place. She said it was impacting her electricity costs and causing damp and mould in the property. She requested compensation for her heating bills.
  4. In the landlord’s final response, it stated that extensive repairs had been carried out on 10 March 2021 and the windows were left fully functioning; it would only replace the windows once they were beyond economical repair. It had arranged a damp and mould inspection on 30 November 2021, but the resident had not allowed the appointment to take place. It offered £50 compensation for time and effort, £100 for distress, £100 for inconvenience and £100 for the delayed complaint response. It said it would assess compensation for heating bills once repairs to the storage heater had been completed.
  5. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she said that the windows were not fit for purpose, which impacted the temperature in the property and was causing damp and mould. She wanted the landlord to replace the windows and compensate for the additional energy costs she had incurred.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has referenced how the landlord’s handling of her reports of the window repair issues in her property has impacted her health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments about her health. However, we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Therefore, we cannot determine whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of the window repair issues and problems with the resident’s health. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which states the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure.

The landlord’s handling of the window repairs

  1. In accordance with the landlord’s repairs policy, it is responsible for repairs to the structure and exterior of the property to ensure it is secure and weatherproof. As such, when the resident reported issues with her windows, the landlord was responsible for investigating the issue and completing the required repairs.
  2. The landlord initially responded appropriately to the resident’s reports of faulty windows. The resident reported issues with her windows on 25 February 2019 and the evidence provided by the landlord indicates that the landlord arranged to complete the required repairs on several occasions throughout 2019. However, the resident refused the repairs as she wanted the windows to be replaced. In accordance with the tenancy agreement, the resident is responsible for providing access for required repairs. Therefore, the landlord would not necessarily be accountable for any delays caused at this stage as it was appropriate for the landlord to attempt to undertake repairs, as there was no indication at this stage that the windows required replacement. As the resident had declined repairs to be completed to the windows, the landlord was limited in the actions it could take.
  3. There was a significant delay in completing repairs during 2020. The repair records show that the work order to inspect and repair the bedroom window was completed on 5 February 2020. However, when the resident raised a complaint on 13 January 2021, as she said the works to the windows were still outstanding, it was identified that the works had been incorrectly marked as completed. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the resident chased the repair during this time period, so there was limited opportunity for the landlord to identify the mistake at an earlier date. The landlord failed to acknowledge this delay in its complaint response.
  4. Once the works had been identified as outstanding, it was appropriate that the landlord advised the resident that it was only attending urgent jobs due to COVID-19. This was a reasonable explanation as it was an unavoidable delay that the landlord did not have control over. In its complaint response, the landlord stated that extensive repairs were carried out on 10 March 2021, including replacement of 12 handles and a rotten frame, and filling in gaps in the windows. It noted that the windows were left fully functional.
  5. The resident disputed that the window had been successfully repaired and stated she had been advised it was a temporary repair. It was therefore appropriate that an inspection took place on 30 June 2021. The contractor recommended to replace the windows, as they had already undergone several repairs. Following an inspection, the landlord is expected to demonstrate that it fulfilled its repair obligations, in line with any recommendations made by the contractor and keep the resident updated on the works required. In this case, despite her numerous requests for the information, the landlord did not provide the resident with a copy of the report until 9 December 2021. There is also no evidence that any further repairs were completed. As a result, the landlord failed to manage the resident’s expectations or fulfil its repair obligations.
  6. If there were appropriate reasons for not completing the recommended work, the landlord would be expected to inform the resident. An additional survey was completed on 29 July 2021 (we have not been provided with a copy), which determined the repairs were in good working order, despite no evidence that any further repairs had been completed. While it can be appropriate for the landlord to follow the recommendations of an alternative contractor, there was no evidence to suggest that either contractor was more qualified to make determinations about the condition of the windows, so it would be unreasonable for the landlord to conclude that either report was more valid than the other. Despite this, the landlord discredited the ability of the initial contractor when it provided the resident with a copy of the report. Given the vastly differing conclusions in the two inspections, and as the resident had continued to report repair issues, it would be expected that there be some repairs recommended in the second report to resolve the issues with the windows. As we have not been provided with a copy of the report from 29 July 2021, we are unable to comment on whether follow-on works were recommended. However, if they were, this was not communicated with the resident and there is no evidence to suggest any further repairs have been completed.
  7. The landlord advised the resident that her windows were not due to be replaced until 2026 due to budget restraints. Social landlords often have limited resources and are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. In view of this, landlords are entitled to opt to repair damaged items such as windows rather than replacing them. However, if it is clear that the repair has been unsuccessful or the windows cannot be economically repaired, they should be replaced. Therefore, it was inappropriate that the landlord referenced budget concerns as a reason for not completing necessary repairs that it is obliged to complete. The landlord would be expected to provide evidence of how it had satisfied the repair obligations, or a clear explanation of why it had determined the repairs were not necessary.
  8. Due to the fact the resident is still reporting issues with the windows, the landlord should reassess the condition of the windows, outline how it proposes to resolve the issues reported by the resident and, if it is not feasible to repair the windows, the landlord should replace them. A further inspection was completed on 17 November 2021 that confirmed the repairs to the windows were still outstanding and that the windows were rotten.
  9. The resident also reported damp and mould in the property due to the faulty windows. In its stage two response, the landlord advised that a damp and mould specialist had attempted to inspect the property on 30 November 2021, but was unable to complete the inspection as the resident would not remove items in order to provide access to the required areas. The resident is expected to provide access to allow for repairs, so therefore, the landlord cannot necessarily be held responsible for the delay in completing the inspection. However, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to advise the resident on how to reschedule the appointment if the issues were persisting and assess whether she required support to remove the items. The landlord’s repair policy states that the resident is responsible for ventilating the property to avoid condensation. It was appropriate that the resident was provided with advice on preventing damp and mould in the property.
  10. In her complaint to the landlord, the resident had requested compensation for additional heating costs due to the faulty windows and heaters. It was appropriate that the landlord requested the resident’s energy bills, in order to determine that the resident’s electricity costs were in line with the national average for properties of that size. In its stage two response, the landlord said that once the repairs had been completed to the resident’s heating, it would compare the bills and establish whether there was a difference. While the landlord should take steps to ensure that compensation is awarded as part of the complaint procedure, in this case it was reasonable that it outlined how it would assess the resident’s compensation claim after. However, as the landlord failed to outline the remaining required repairs to the heaters and the timeframe for the works, it failed to manage the resident’s expectations regarding when it would reassess her request for compensation. There is also no evidence to suggest that the landlord has provided any updates regarding compensation or the outstanding repairs to the heaters since the completion of the complaints process.
  11. In accordance with this Service’s remedy guidance, awards of £100-£600 are appropriate in cases where the landlord has made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident and the offer of compensation was not proportionate to the level of failing identified. In this case, the landlord has offered £50 compensation for time and effort, £100 for distress and £100 for inconvenience. However, the landlord has failed to provide a sufficient explanation for why it has not completed the works recommended by the inspection and therefore has not provided satisfactory evidence that it has fulfilled its repair obligations. In light of this, the landlord should award the resident an additional £150 compensation.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy states that it will respond to stage one complaints within ten working days and stage two complaints within 20 working days. It states that if the timeframes cannot be met, it will provide reasons for the delay and respond within a further ten working days.
  2. The resident initially raised a complaint on 22 March 2021 and the landlord issued its initial stage one response on 28 June 2021, which exceeded its complaint response timeframe by 57 working days. The resident escalated her complaint on 13 July 2021 and subsequently raised a further complaint on 17 August 2021. The landlord issued a second stage one response on 30 August 2021. The landlord should have recognised that the resident had raised a further complaint regarding the same issue, as the landlord had failed to acknowledge her escalation request. It was therefore inappropriate for the landlord to issue a further stage one response as it unnecessarily extended the complaint process and caused additional time and effort to the resident in pursuing the complaint.
  3. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 17 August 2021, and offered a £20 gift card for the delay in escalating the complaint. The landlord then sent a further stage two acknowledgement on 8 February 2022 as this Service asked it to issue its stage two response, following correspondence from the resident. The landlord issued its stage two response on 8 March 2022. This was a significant delay from when the resident initially requested the complaint to be escalated on 17 August 2021.
  4. The landlord offered £100 for its delay in responding to the complaint at stage two. However, the level of compensation was not proportionate to the time taken to resolve the complaint and it had not acknowledged the additional failings outlined in this report. In accordance with this Service’s remedy guidance, compensation in the range of £100-£600 is appropriate in cases where the landlord has “made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident and/or the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation”. As a result, the landlord should award the resident an additional £150 compensation. It should also assess its staff training requirements in relation to the application of its complaint handling policy, to ensure that further failings are avoided.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the resident’s reports of repair issues to her windows.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the formal complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident:
    1. £350 as offered in its complaint response if it has not done so already.
    2. £200 as a result of the additional failings identified in this report of its handling of the resident’s reports of window repair issues.
    3. £150 due to the complaint handling failures outlined in this report.
    4. The landlord should provide proof of the total payment of £700 to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.
  2. The landlord should complete an independent survey on the resident’s windows and complete any required repairs or replacement. The landlord should ensure that the required work is completed within three months of this report.
  3. The landlord should complete any outstanding heating repairs within four weeks of the date of this report, if it has not done so already. It should then assess the resident’s electricity bills and award additional compensation if it is identified that the repair issues caused an increase in her electricity costs.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident to discuss rebooking the damp inspection.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord reviews its staff training requirements regarding its complaint handling process.