Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (202106240)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202106240

Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited

4 May 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:

a. The resident’s reports of low water pressure and repair issues affecting the kitchen and bathroom.

b. The resident’s request for a replacement door key.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
  2. The landlord’s repair records state that on 26 February 2021, the resident reported that there was low water pressure in the kitchen and bathroom sinks and there was damage to the kitchen cupboards and door. The resident reported to the landlord that her key to the communal entrance door for the building was broken on 6 April 2021, which she then chased on 8 April 2021.
  3. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 12 April 2021, as she had not received the letter required to collect a new key, which the landlord had advised she would receive on 10 April 2021. She also said the landlord had not addressed the low water pressure or the repair issues she had reported in the kitchen and bathroom. In her complaint escalation on 22 April 2021, the resident said she still did not have a replacement key.
  4. In the landlord’s final response to the complaint, it said that an inspection had taken place on 27 April 2021, and a contractor would reattend on 5 May 2021 to complete minor repair works. It said it had sent the letter the resident required to collect a new key on 12 April 2021. It had also explained the process of collecting a new key and suggested that the resident got a spare key to avoid a recurrence of the issue. It offered the resident £20 compensation for time and trouble.
  5. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she said that she still had low water pressure and other repair issues were still outstanding. She wanted compensation for the delays to the repair works and arranging a new key.

Assessment and findings

The repairs

  1. In accordance with the landlord’s repair guide, the landlord is responsible for repairs to sanitary fixtures and fittings, therefore it is obliged to respond to the resident’s reports of low water pressure and carry out any required repairs. The repair would be classed as a routine repair, and in line with the landlord’s repair policy, it should be completed within 28 days. The landlord’s repairs record states that the resident initially reported the low water pressure on 26 February 2021 and she stated that the issue was still outstanding in her complaint on 12 April 2021. It had therefore already exceeded its timeframe for the repairs when the resident raised the complaint.
  2. In a later internal email on 26 July 2021, the landlord stated that a contractor had attended on 28 April 2021 and advised that follow on works were required, but the landlord had not raised a work order for the proposed repairs. A contractor then carried out a further inspection on 11 November 2021 and identified another fault that could have caused low water pressure. However, there is no evidence to indicate that the repairs have since been completed. As a result, the landlord has failed to comply with its repair obligations and it exceeded its repair timeframes, which caused the resident prolonged inconvenience and additional time and effort in pursuing the issue.
  3. The resident reported damage to her kitchen units and kitchen door on 26 February 2021. In its complaint response, the landlord stated a contractor would attend on 5 May 2021 to complete minor repairs, however, the resident informed the landlord on 6 May 2021 that the contractor did not attend the appointment. The resident then confirmed to the landlord on 26 July 2021 that the repairs to her kitchen cupboards and kitchen door had since been resolved. While the delay was not as significant as the delay in fixing the low water pressure, the landlord still exceeded its repair timeframe and communicated poorly with the resident regarding the repair, which again led to additional time and effort for the resident in chasing the repairs.
  4. The landlord failed to properly address the resident’s repair issues within its complaint responses and as a result the issue is still outstanding. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence to suggest the low water pressure has been resolved. The resident had to chase the issue repeatedly, and when she raised the issue in the complaint, the landlord failed to specifically address her repair concerns or arrange relevant appointments. The landlord contacted the resident regarding the issue on 26 July 2021, after the resident had raised the complaint to this Service, however it should have ensured all relevant work was completed or arranged as part of its complaint response. In accordance with this Service’s remedy guidance (published on our website), awards of £250 to £700 are appropriate in instances where the landlord has failed to act in accordance with its policy over a considerable amount of time, including addressing repairs, and when the landlord has failed to engage with the substance of the complaint. In view of the landlord’s failure to act in accordance with its repairs policy over several months or meaningfully address and remedy the resident’s repair concerns in the complaint, compensation of £300 is appropriate.

Replacement key

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord will not replace door keys, and the resident is responsible for arranging the replacement. However, although the resident is responsible for replacing the key, in order to do so she required a letter of authorisation from the landlord to obtain a new key. The landlord does not have set guidance regarding a response timeframe for this issue, however it would be expected to provide a prompt response in view of the difficulties a resident would experience due to not having a key and it should appropriately manage the resident’s expectations regarding the timeframe.
  2. The landlord initially failed to contact the resident when it advised it would call her regarding the issue, so she chased the issue on 8 April 2021. The landlord then advised that the resident would receive the letter on 10 April 2021, however in its complaint response it advised that it had sent the letter on 12 April 2021, thus exceeding its outlined timeframe. Despite the delay, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord discussed interim measures while the resident was waiting for a replacement key, or ensured that she could access the building in the meantime. On 13 April 2021, the resident informed the landlord she was unable to get a new key cut, as her current key had snapped; there is no evidence to suggest the landlord responded to the issue and the resident advised in her complaint escalation on 22 April 2021, she still did not have a key. The landlord’s poor communication led to increased time and effort by the resident, and a delay in resolving the issue. The landlord did suggest that the resident got a spare key to avoid a recurrence of the issue, which indicates that it had learnt from the outcome of the complaint.
  3. It is acknowledged that the landlord attempted to put things right for the resident by offering £20 for time and trouble in its complaint response. however this amount is not sufficient to adequately compensate the resident in view of all the circumstances. In accordance with this Service’s remedy guidance, as set out above, compensation of £50-£250 is appropriate when the landlord has failed to meet its service standards, over a short duration of time causing some inconvenience to the resident. In this case, compensation of £100 would be appropriate, as the landlord’s failed to promptly act upon the resident’s report of a broken key or adhere to the timeframes it set, although, the issue was resolved in a relatively short period of time.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in way it handled the resident’s reports of low water pressure and repair issues affecting the kitchen and bathroom.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in way it handled the resident’s request for a replacement door key.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to complete any outstanding repair works, recommended by the contractor, to resolve the low water pressure. The landlord should ensure this is carried out in line with its published repair timescales.
  2. In light of the additional time and effort caused to the resident, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident:
    1. £300 for its failings in handling the resident’s repair issues.
    2. £100 for its failings in handling the resident’s request for a replacement key. The landlord’s offer of £20 compensation can be deducted from the total compensation if the £20 has already been paid.
  3. The landlord should provide evidence of the payment to this Service within four weeks of this report.