London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202125466)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202125466

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

15 September 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 repairs to lights in the resident’s communal hallway.

Background

2. The resident is a leaseholder and the landlord is the freeholder of the building. The property is a flat within a communal building.
3. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 26 October 2021, as he had initially reported a broken light in the communal area on 4 November 2020 and the issue was still outstanding despite regularly chasing the landlord. In its stage one complaint response on 8 February 2022, the landlord apologised for the delay and advised it had experienced difficulty in obtaining the correct light bulbs to complete the work. It said contractors were scheduled to attend on 15 February 2022 to complete the work.
4. On 8 February 2022, the resident said he was dissatisfied with the quality of the light replacements. In its stage two complaint response on 22 April 2022, the landlord stated that a contractor would reattend within the next ten working days to install lights with uniform fittings and light colour. It offered £100 for the delay in sourcing the materials to complete the repair and £40 for its delayed complaint response. The works were still outstanding on 1 June 2022, so the landlord awarded a further £100 compensation.
5. In the resident’s complaint to this Service on 27 May 2022, he said he remained dissatisfied as the landlord had not completed the work as advised in the stage two comolaint response. He wanted the landlord to replace all the light fittings to match the ones previously installed.

Assessment and findings

6. The landlord is expected to ensure that there is adequate lighting in the communal areas of the building to mitigate any health and safety and security concerns. This responsibility is also outlined within the lease agreement. As such, when the resident reported that there were faulty lights in the communal area, the landlord was obliged to complete the required repairs to ensure the lighting was fully reinstated. The landlord’s repair policy states that routine repairs will be completed within a reasonable timeframe “at the earliest mutually convenient appointment” and emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours.
7. The resident initially reported that a light in the communal area needed replacing on 2 November 2020, as the light was flickering. The resident then chased the repair on several occasions. The landlord advised the resident that the contractor had experienced issues accessing the meter cupboard to complete the work on 15 February 2021 and a follow-on appointment to change the lock was completed on 16 March 2021, to allow the work to be completed. There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord provided any further updates to the resident until he raised a complaint on 26 October 2021. The landlord sent its stage one response on 8 February 2022 and confirmed the lightbulb had been replaced. It apologised for the delay and said it was caused due to difficulty obtaining the correct lightbulbs.
8. While there can be appropriate reasons for why the landlord cannot complete repair works within the usual expected timeframe, the landlord should ensure that these reasons are communicated with the resident and the work is completed as soon as possible. In this case, it was reasonable that the work was delayed due to supply issues. However, the landlord would have been expected to advise the resident of this when it became aware of the delay, to avoid causing the resident additional time and effort in chasing the repair. Overall, it took over a year to complete the repair, which significantly exceeded a reasonable timeframe, which would typically be within 20 working days for routine, non-emergency repairs.
9. The resident emailed the landlord on 16 February 2022, as he was not satisfied with the light bulbs and fittings that had been used to complete the repair. He stated that the light fittings did not match the existing ones and the lightbulb colour was different. Landlords are generally expected to replace items for a similar match, however, that is not always possible depending on what the landlord and its contractor are able to source. The landlord would therefore not necessarily have been obliged to change the lightbulbs to meet the resident’s request, as the contractor had ensured the lighting was functioning and the landlord is not required to make the lighting uniform in accordance with its repair obligations. However, the landlord advised the resident on 22 April 2022, in its stage two response, that the lights would be changed within ten working days, so it was responsible for ensuring the work was completed within the given timeframe.
10. Despite the landlord’s clear timeframe, the resident has since had to chase the repair on numerous occasions, and there is no evidence to confirm that the work has been completed. The landlord’s timescale did not seem feasible, as in an internal email on 12 April 2022, the contractor advised it had replaced the faulty light fittings with the closest match they could find. The contractor reattended on 29 April 2022 but was not able to complete the work as the correct fittings were not in stock; the landlord said it would arrange a further appointment when the lights had been delivered. The resident disputed that the lights were difficult to source and while it is understood that the landlord’s response may have frustrated the resident, the landlord is entitled to rely on the opinions of its appropriately qualified contractors concerning the availability of materials. Despite this, the landlord should have better managed the resident’s expectations regarding when the work would be completed, based on the contractor’s advice on the availability of the required light fittings.
11. In the most recent correspondence provided to this Service, on 12 July 2022, the landlord advised the contractors were waiting for the lightbulbs to be delivered, and the repair would be treated as a priority. Although the landlord has been in regular contact with the resident and provided reasons for the delay, the resident has had to spend significant time and effort to get the issue resolved. It is not clear from the evidence provided whether the repair is still outstanding. If it is outstanding, the landlord should contact the resident to arrange an appointment and appropriately manage his expectations regarding the timeframe of the works.
12. In line with this Service’s remedy guidance (published on our website), awards of £50-£250 are appropriate in cases where the landlord has failed to meet service standards for actions. In this case, the landlord has offered a total of £200 for the delay in completing the repairs. The initial delay was significant in repairing the lights, however there is no indication that the communal area had entirely without lighting during this period, so therefore the detrimental impact on the resident would have been less than if there was no lighting at all. Furthermore, the additional work to provide matching lights was not necessary from a safety and security point of view and the landlord was not strictly obliged to complete it under the lease agreement. However, it was appropriate that the landlord offered compensation in recognition that it did not promptly fulfil its repair responsibilities or appropriately manage the resident’s expectations regarding the repair timeframe, which caused the resident significant time and effort as he had to chase the repair. Overall, the landlord has demonstrated that it has acknowledged its failings and offered appropriate compensation.

Determination

13. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of repairs to lights in the communal hallway satisfactorily.

Recommendations

14. If the lighting repair is outstanding, the landlord should contact the resident and reasonably manage his expectations regarding when the work will be completed.
15. If it has not done so already, it is recommended that the landlord pays the resident the compensation outlined in its complaint responses.