One Housing Group Limited (202422327)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202422327

One Housing Group Limited

28 August 2025

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 reports of a blocked kitchen sink.

Background 

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom flat.
3. On 1 July 2024 the resident reported that the kitchen sink was blocked. The landlord raised an emergency repair but no-one attended. On the following 3 days (2, 3 and 4 July 2024) the resident reported the repair again. On 4 July 2024 the repairs notes say that the job “said cancelled but was still live’’. The evidence suggests the landlord raised a further job on 4 July 2024 and the contractor attempted to contact the resident to arrange an appointment but they were unable to make contact.
4. On 7 July 2024 the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. She explained she still had not received any contact about the repair and therefore she used a private plumber who had repaired the blocked sink on 6 July 2024. The resident said she wanted an apology, an assurance of an improved service and compensation for the inconvenience. The resident also wanted reimbursement of the £200 fee paid to the private plumber.
5. On 24 July 2024 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It acknowledged the delay in repair and its impact on the resident. It explained that it did not compensate for loss of earnings or reimburse any payment made to a private contractor without its consent. It explained it was actively implementing a service improvement program to reduce delays and improve communication with residents. It offered a total of £190 compensation made up of £150 for the inconvenience caused and £40 for 4 missed appointments.
6. On 1 August 2024 the resident requested escalation of her complaint. She explained she was unhappy with the amount of compensation offered as it does not accurately take into account the days she took off work for appointments and the subsequent loss of earnings, the overall delays, and stress and inconvenience caused. The resident said she wanted £500 compensation.
7. On 22 August 2024, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It acknowledged the delay and its impact on the resident. However, it reiterated that it neither compensated for loss of earnings nor reimbursed the cost of using a private contractor without its consent.
8. On 8 September 2024 the resident referred the complaint to us as she was not satisfied with the landlord’s compensation offer.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

9. Throughout the period of the complaint, the resident raised concerns about how the issues and the landlord’s subsequent service delivery may have impacted on her health. We are unable to make a determination that the actions or omissions of a landlord have had a causal impact on a person’s health. Such a determination is more appropriate through an insurance claim or by a court. Should the resident wish to pursue a personal injury claim she has the option to seek legal advice. We have, however, taken into account any general distress and inconvenience that the landlord’s service delivery may have caused.

Landlord’s handling of reports of a blocked kitchen sink

10. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord must keep in repair and proper working order any installations it provides, including sinks. This reflects the landlord’s obligations under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
11. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that it will maintain fixtures and fittings for water and sanitation, including sinks. It will respond to emergency repairs within 4 hours and make safe within 12 hours.
12. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s reports of a blocked kitchen from 1 to 4 July 2024. The evidence suggests the landlord appropriately raised this as an emergency repair which meant that it would attend within 24 hours in line with its repair policy. In its complaint response it acknowledged that it had not done so and that it had missed 4 appointments. This was not appropriate and not in accordance with the landlord’s response time for emergency repairs.
13. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord explained that after the first report (1 July 2024), the job was sent to its contractors however due to a system error, they did not receive it. While system errors can take place and might have been beyond the landlord’s control, it should have in place an effective system to pick up any missed or incorrectly cancelled repairs. This is particularly important when it has assessed a repair as an emergency.
14. During this repair period, the resident was inconvenienced by reporting the repair on 4 occasions. There was no proactive contact by the landlord or its contractor. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have effectively communicated with the resident and taken ownership of the repair, particularly following subsequent reports where the resident explained the delay.
15. Furthermore, in her complaint, the resident explained she took 2 days off work for the appointments which did not take place. This could have been avoided if the landlord had effectively communicated with the resident. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint response that the resident missed work because of the missed appointments but explained that it did not provide compensation for loss of earnings. This was appropriate as it was in accordance with its compensation policy. However, we recognise the inconvenience caused from the repeated missed appointments over 4 calendar days and the landlord’s failure to resolve the repair issue.
16. The resident wanted an assurance of a better service moving forward and the landlord explained in its complaint response that it was actively implementing a service improvement program to reduce the instances of these issues moving forward, and to ensure a better communication with residents. This was appropriate and demonstrated that the landlord took the resident’s comment seriously.
17. In the complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that repair was delayed and it failed to provide a solution, and there had been a breakdown in communication between the landlord and its contractors. This amounts to service failure. The landlord accepted its failure and offered compensation for inconvenience caused (£150) and missed appointments (£40). The total of £190 compensation is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance and proportionate for the distress and inconvenience caused.
18. The resident requested reimbursement (£200) for the cost of the private plumber which the landlord refused on the basis that it did not provide compensation for such reimbursements. However, its compensation policy says that it will pay discretionary compensation where there has been actual, proven financial loss sustained as a direct result of a service failure. In this case it was reasonable, given the lack of action by the landlord, for the resident to engage a private plumber. The landlord itself has acknowledged there was a service failure here and the resident sustained a financial loss as a direct result. It would therefore have been appropriate for the landlord to have reimbursed the plumber’s fee in line with its compensation policy.
19. An order has been made for the landlord to reimburse the resident the sum of £200 for the cost of the private plumber.

Determination

20. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of reports of a blocked kitchen sink.

Orders

21. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay a total compensation of £390 to the resident for its handling of reports of a blocked kitchen sink. This amount is comprised of:
       1. £190 compensation (if not paid already) to the resident offered during its complaints process for the likely impact of the landlord’s failures.
       2. £200 for the cost of the private plumber upon receipt of the invoice (if it has not received it already).
    3. Provide evidence to us of compliance with the above orders.