Midland Heart Limited (202200019)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202200019

Midland Heart

23 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:
    1. handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her porch roof, leaks inside her property, and hanging wires;
    2. complaints handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The landlord is a registered provider of social housing.
  2. In August 2021, the landlord repaired the resident’s porch roof following a leak. In September 2021, the resident reported that the contractors had left glue residue down the side of her property, and a hanging electrical wire over her window. She raised a complaint about these issues on 24 September 2021. After the landlord failed to respond, she re-raised the complaint in October 2021.
  3. The landlord responded in October 2021, and acknowledged that the contractors did not tidy up after the roof repairs and had left the glue residue and the hanging wire outstanding. It arranged for these works to be resolved. It also apologised for a lack of communication on its part and offered the resident £70 compensation in recognition of this and the delay to tidying up after her repairs.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint in October 2021 as she felt that the landlord had not taken her concerns about health and safety (regarding the hanging wire) seriously. The resident subsequently added additional concerns to her complaint, including concerns over the original repairs to her porch roof, water stains inside the porch, a missed repair appointment, and continued poor communication from the landlord.
  5. The landlord gave its final response in February 2022. It assured the resident that it had inspected her porch roof and the water stains, finding that the roof was in good condition and the water stains were historical. It acknowledged that there had been further failings in its communication, and offered an additional £35 in light of this. It also offered to redecorate over the resident’s water stains as a goodwill gesture.
  6. The resident has explained to this service that she is concerned the repairs to her porch roof have not been completed correctly, as there is a constant water stain on the outside of her home. She has also stated that she is dissatisfied that the landlord only wallpapered her porch, rather than repainting it. Additionally, she has complained about the delay in removing the hanging wires and cleaning up the glue residue left behind by the landlord’s operatives. The resident has asked to be compensated £3,600 for the landlord’s failings and for the landlord to reinvestigate her porch roof.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has complained to this service of additional issues, such as water splatters from the roof and internal leaks in her kitchen. Although she has reported these issues to the landlord, they have not yet been considered through its complaint procedure. Under section 39(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints that have not been brought to the attention of a member as a formal complaint and subsequently have completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. Should the resident to raise her concerns with her landlord and progress the concerns through the landlord’s formal complaint procedure, this service may then be able to consider these concerns.
  2. A recommendation has nevertheless been made below that the landlord contact the resident to discuss her ongoing concerns about leaks, and arrange a further investigation if necessary.

Repair issues

  1. The landlord’s website states that it is responsible for the roof, external walls, boundary walls, internal walls, door frames, and plasterwork. The resident is responsible for internal decorations. It also explains that routine repairs should take between 20-28 days to complete.
  2. In response to the resident’s concerns that her porch roof had been repaired incorrectly, the landlord acted appropriately by carrying out an inspection of the roof in November 2021. The resident remained concerned and so the landlord sent out a surveyor in February 2022. Both inspections found that the roof was structurally sound and was not leaking. It explained to the resident that the water stains were historical. Given that the landlord had carried out multiple inspections which resulted in the same findings, it was reasonable for the landlord to conclude that the resident’s roof was structurally sound.
  3. Despite its position that it was not obligated to undertake internal decoration, the landlord initially issued the resident with a £35 decoration voucher to decorate over the water marks. It subsequently offered to redecorate the resident’s porch as a further goodwill gesture. Although the resident is dissatisfied that the landlord has only wallpapered and not painted her porch, the landlord has acted appropriately in using its discretion to help the resident redecorate, given that she is responsible for all internal decoration.
  4. In her complaint, the resident stated that she felt the landlord was dismissive of her concerns about health and safety regarding the hanging wire, as she wanted it to be viewed as an emergency repair. The landlord’s website states that an emergency repair is something that causes an immediate health and safety or security risk, or substantial damage to a resident’s home. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns was reasonable, as it consulted with its repair team, who concluded that the wire’s positioning was not an immediate safety risk. When responding to the repair, it explained to the resident its definition of an emergency repair, and attempted to placate her fears of health and safety by explaining that the wire did not pose a risk.
  5. The resident first reported that the landlord’s operatives had left behind glue residue and a hanging wire on 16 September 2021. The landlord did not resolve these issues until 28 October 2021. Its repairs guidance states it should complete routine repairs within the maximum of 28 days. As such, its response was outside of its own policy guidelines.
  6. While delays can sometimes be reasonable, especially if the landlord managed the resident’s expectations accordingly, the landlord also missed a repair appointment on 20 October 2021. The resident was required to chase the landlord for another appointment, due to its lack of communication. The delays to these repairs, along with the poor communication would have caused frustration for the resident and amounted to service failure in the circumstances.
  7. In its complaint response, the landlord acted reasonably in assuring the resident that its surveyor had inspected her roof, concluding that it was structurally sound. It also explained that it had arranged for redecoration works to take place in March 2022, to cover the water stains.
  8. The landlord also acknowledged its service failure regarding its delays to the repairs and its poor communication. In response to these failings, the landlord initially offered £70 compensation, and then an additional £35 for further communication delays. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the compensation amount offered, combined with the landlord’s offer to redecorate, amounted to reasonable redress for its failings in this regard.

Complaints handling

  1. In line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), the landlord is expected to log all complaints and respond to the resident. The resident made a complaint on 16 September 2021. The landlord failed to respond to the resident, who was then required to re-raise it on 5 October 2021. The landlord’s failure to acknowledge or respond to the resident’s complaint without explanation amounted to service failure.
  2. According to the landlord’s complaints guide, it has 10 working days to respond to the resident’s complaint. After an escalation, it then has 20 working days to respond. The landlord sent its stage two response on 23 February 2022, four months after the resident’s escalation on 19 October 2021. The resident also chased a response from the landlord on several occasions. This delay is unreasonable, and outside of the landlord’s own policy guidelines.
  3. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint was not in line with its own policy guidelines, or that of the Code. Due to the mistakes made, resolution for the resident was unnecessarily protracted, causing her unnecessary stress and inconvenience. This amounts to a service failure, which the landlord did not adequately address in its complaint’s procedure. An amount of £100 compensation is ordered in recognition of the service failures identified.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, and in the Ombudsman’s opinion, there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord for its service failure in respect of the complaint regarding its handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her porch roof, leaks inside her property, and hanging wires.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay compensation of £100 for its ineffective complaints handling.
  2. This amount must be paid within four weeks of the date of this determination.

Recommendations

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord to reiterate its offer of £105 compensation for its service failure in relation to the repairs, if this is yet to be accepted.
  2. Within four weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord to contact the resident and request further information regarding her concerns about ongoing leaks. If necessary, the landlord to arrange a further investigation of the leaks.