Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (202101131)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202101131

Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited

12 April 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 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the communal ventilation system.
    2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is the leaseholder of the property. The landlord is the freeholder. The resident lives in a block of flats that contains a communal ventilation system, which supplies ventilation to her bathroom.
  2. During June and August 2019, the resident reported to the landlord that the communal ventilation system needed repairs, as the extractor fan was not working, and was emitting foul smells within her property. It initially hired contractor A to complete the repairs to the ventilation system from March 2020 onwards. However, over the course of the next several months, they failed to complete their inspections for this, so the landlord hired another contractor (contractor B) from July 2020 to complete the repairs instead.
  3. Contractor B completed their repair diagnostics for the communal ventilation system in January 2021, but they stated that, due to the size of the ventilation system, they were not equipped to complete the repairs to this. Due to this, a third contractor (contractor C) was contacted to complete the repairs to the ventilation system from January 2021 onwards.
  4. The resident raised a stage one complaint with the landlord about its handling of repairs to the communal ventilation system in October 2019. A stage one response was not provided to her by it until 18 February 2021. The landlord apologised for the delays and inconvenience caused, and it explained that the repairs to the ventilation system were taking longer than expected due to it having to hire three separate contractors over the course of an almost two-year period. The landlord further explained that contractor C would complete the repairs by 15 March 2021.
  5. By way of redress the landlord offered the resident £365 total compensation. This was calculated by it as consisting of £160 for the failure of its service, £175 for her time and trouble, and £30 for its poor complaint handling. The landlord further added that training needs had been identified as a consequence of the resident’s experience and were being acted upon. It explained that it would also use her complaint as part of a case study, with the intention of improving its services and to gain a better understanding of the root causes behind such failures.
  6. Contractor C completed their works to repair the communal ventilation system on 9 March 2021, but the resident made further reports that the communal ventilators were blowing air instead of extracting this, making them unfit for purpose. A final stage complaint was then raised by her with it on 12 April 2021, as she still had no ventilation system in her bathroom due to the communal ventilation system not fully functioning for approximately a year and eight months. A final stage complaint response was subsequently provided by the landlord to the resident on 19 May 2021, which explained that it had contacted contractor C to inspect the property and confirm the repairs that were outstanding. A completion date of end of June 2021 was provided to the resident.
  7. To prevent the recurring issues with the communal ventilation system, the landlord explained that it would regularly service this by creating a servicing schedule for communal ventilation systems, so that repairs to these were less likely to be required in the future. It also acknowledged that its communication about this was poor on some occasions, and that it did not deliver repairs to the ventilation system within a reasonable timescale.
  8. The landlord further explained that the use of multiple contractors and transfers of responsibility by it between its different teams and individuals played a significant part in its delays, and that its record keeping was not of good standard so that individual repairs were missed. It stated that it would therefore review the way it delivered service to residents, in order to make significant improvements and make changes to improve oversight of its repair teams.
  9. In addition, the landlord stated that reviews of the working practices and structure of its complaints team would commence, in order to ensure an effective delivery service for residents. Moreover, feedback would be provided to the management structure within its customer care team regarding the initial handling of the complaint and would be monitored in future monthly performance reviews. The landlord also offered the resident £500 further compensation in total. It calculated this as consisting of £200 in recognition of the time trouble she incurred pursuing the repairs and the complaint, £200 to address the failure in service on its part in delivering the repairs outside of its advertised timeframes, and £100 for its poor complaint handling.
  10. The resident then made a complaint to this Service about the landlord’s handling of the communal ventilation system and of her complaint to it. She confirmed that the £365 compensation offered by it for her stage one complaint to it was awarded to her service charge account, and that she was awaiting payment of the £500 compensation offered for by it for her final stage complaint. Overall, the resident was therefore offered £865 total compensation by the landlord, which she confirmed had arranged for the repairs to the ventilation system to be completed on 17 May 2021. However, she was dissatisfied that these took 655 days to complete since her first repair report, for which she referred her complaint to this Service for an investigation.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the communal ventilation system

  1. The landlord acknowledged that there were significant and excessive delays in its handling of the repairs to the resident’s communal ventilation system, as these were completed over the course of an almost two-year period from June 2019 to May 2021. Multiple contractors being involved in the repairs and inefficient record keeping were among the factors that were acknowledged by it as having contributed to the excessive repair delays. The landlord’s subsequent complaint responses in February and May 2021, however, appropriately apologised to the resident for its failings, assessed the areas of concern, and implemented meaningful changes to prevent future adversities, such as improving oversight on its repairs team.
  2. In addition, the landlord’s intention, in its February 2021 stage one complaint response, to review the way it delivered its service to its residents and its identification of its staff’s training needs, demonstrated a willingness to not only learn from its outcomes, but to also put things right for the resident. It was appropriate for it to have evaluated areas of improvement, and to have explained to her what impactful changes it would make in its conduct and practices. Moreover, using the resident’s complaint as a case study to assist in making improvements and gaining a better understanding of the root causes of failures was in line with this Service’s dispute resolution principles, as this further demonstrated the landlord’s receptiveness to learn from outcomes.
  3. Furthermore, the landlord acted reasonably in its May 2021 final stage complaint response by implementing a servicing schedule for the communal ventilation system, which sought to ensure that the ventilation system was serviced on a regular basis. This measure was described by it as being likely to help to decrease the chances of the ventilation system needing repairs, and to prevent future mishaps from occurring, which was appropriate. This action was also in line with its repairs guide, as the landlord was required by this to check and inspect the quality of repairs to ensure that its contractors were carrying out work to a high standard.
  4. Moreover, the total compensation offered by the landlord’s complaint responses to the resident of £865 was proportionate to put things right in all the circumstances of her case. This is because it used its discretion to exceed the maximum amounts recommended in its tariff of discretionary compensation payments and guidance on awarding compensation in its total offer to her. These were up to £350 each for a high level of failure by it in respect of its failure in service and her time and trouble, and up to £150 for its poor complaint handling, which would therefore have otherwise been a maximum of £850 total compensation.
  5. The total amount of compensation offered by the landlord to the resident also reflected the severity and longevity of the delays to the communal ventilation system repair that she experienced from it between June 2019 and May 2021. Its offer, which exceeded the maximum amount recommended by its tariff and guidance, was therefore an appropriate sum to put things right for her and recognise any detriment caused to her by her experience. As the resident has confirmed that £365 of the landlord’s compensation offer was already awarded to her service charge account, it has been recommended below that it pay her the remaining £500 that it offered her, if it has not already done so.
  6. The resident was reportedly without ventilation in her bathroom for 655 days as result of the outstanding repairs to the communal ventilation system, which was an excessive amount of time to be without ventilation. However, the landlord acknowledged and apologised to her for its failings in respect of this, explained the reason for the delays to the repairs, learnt from the outcome of this by making significant change to its practices and conduct, put things right by reviewing the way it delivered services to residents, and offered her appropriate compensation to reflect the length of the delays.
  7. Therefore, the actions taken by the landlord in response to its failings were both proportionate and reasonable redress for any detriment experienced by the resident. To further add, a landlord’s record keeping is a crucial aspect of its overall service delivery, and it acknowledged that inefficient record keeping contributed to the delays by causing individual repairs to be missed. Therefore, the landlord has been recommended below to carry out a review of its record keeping practices in relation to communal and associated individual repairs to ensure that neither are missed when changes occur, and to consider additional staff training and improvements to its practices to be implemented in light of its subsequent findings.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it aims to respond to stage one complaints within ten working days, and to final stage complaints within 20 working days. It did not follow its complaint procedure in respect of the resident’s stage one complaint in October 2019, however, as its stage one response on 18 February 2021 exceeded the designated timeframe by approximately 15 months. The landlord also responded to the resident’s final stage complaint of 12 April 2021 six working days later than the above timeframe for this on 19 May 2021. However, it then took appropriate steps by taking ownership of these errors, apologising for the delays, explaining the reasons behind them, and awarding her proportionate compensation in its responses.
  2. Moreover, the landlord’s final stage complaint response to the resident appropriately outlined that the working practices and structure of its complaints team would be reviewed in order to deliver a more effective service for residents. It also put things right by recognising its above complaint handling delays at a level exceeding the £150 recommended for poor complaint handling in its tariff of discretionary compensation payments and guidance on awarding compensation within its £865 total compensation offer to her.
  3. The landlord additionally acted reasonably and demonstrated that it had learnt from the outcome of the resident’s case by confirming in its final stage complaint response to her that it was administering changes to its customer care team. It explained that it was doing so by providing feedback to the team’s management structure on its initial handling of her complaint, and that it would be monitoring them in the future via monthly performance reviews, which was appropriate.
  4. The landlord therefore awarded suitable compensation to the resident and took proactive measures by implementing significant changes to its complaints team to ensure that future occurrences of poor complaint handling by it were less likely to occur. These actions were proportionate and were reasonable redress to her for its failings, as they put things right for her, acknowledged and apologised for the delays in its complaint handling, and demonstrated its learning from outcomes.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of repairs to the communal ventilation system satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its complaint handling satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Pay the resident the £500 further compensation that it previously offered her, if it has not already done so.
    2. Carry out a review of its record keeping practices in relation to communal and associated individual repairs to ensure that neither are missed when changes occur, and consider any additional staff training and improvements to its practices to be implemented in light of its subsequent findings.