Onward Homes Limited (202422387)

Background

1. The resident lives with her 3 young children. She says 2 of her children are vulnerable. She reported repairs for her living room window, kitchen tap, and bath and complained about the landlord’s handling of these repairs.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Repairs to and replacement of a window.
   2. Repairs to the kitchen tap.
   3. Repairs to the bathroom.
   4. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to and replacement of a window.
4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Repairs to the kitchen tap.
   2. Repairs to the bathroom.
5. The was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord failed to replace the window, despite knowing it needed to be replaced. The replacement has been outstanding for over 3 years. The resident had consistently reported it is loose and liable to fall out, was causing a draft, and her fears for her young children’s safety.
7. The landlord delayed in repairing the kitchen tap and the repair it did complete did not resolve the issue. The tap cannot be fully turned off.
8. Despite the landlord inspecting the bathroom it did not make a record or produce a report. It did not tell the resident the outcome of the inspection until its stage 2 response. It then delayed in completing repairs and did these poorly.
9. The landlord failed to escalate the resident’s complaint and acknowledge it for an unacceptable amount of time. It did however accept its failings, apologise, and pay reasonable compensation.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

10. The landlord has not provided a full copy of the resident’s tenancy agreement. However, section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 inserts into all tenancies repairing obligations. The landlord is responsible for repairing and maintaining the structure of the building, including windows. Under its repairs policy the landlord will complete repairs “within prescribed timeframes to a high level of workmanship”. The policy refers to regional repairs priorities within its procedure. Despite being asked, the landlord has failed to provide a copy of its procedure.
11. Following previous re-glazing, the resident reported to the landlord that her living room window was loose in its frame. She said it had gaps around it which let in a draft, rattled in the wind, and she was scared it would fall out. She was extremely worried as she has 3 young children, including a baby at the time, and did not want any to fall from the window.
12. The landlord recorded no accesses for booked appointments to inspect the window on 8 September 2022, 6 December 2022, 13 January 2023, and 25 October 2023. Within its repairs policy it does not specify what it will do in the event of a no access. However, it has provided a process map. This says it will call the resident and wait up to 15 minutes for the resident to return. If it cannot speak to the resident, it will send a text message, leave a calling card, and cancel the repair. There is no evidence the landlord followed its process for no accesses, which is a failing. Additionally, a process which cancels a repair following a single no access is not reasonable. If the landlord was responsible for the repair, it would remain responsible, and a no access does not absolve it of that responsibility.
13. Positively as part of the landlord’s stage 1 response it said it had raised a new repair to measure up the window. It inspected and confirmed, in an internal email, that it needed to replace the window on 22 February 2024. This was one and a half years after the resident first reported her concerns. The landlord delayed until July 2024 to ask for a quote for the works which it received from its contractor the same day. It then delayed in approving it which was a failing. By 11 September 2024 in an internal email the landlord said it had cancelled the repair, and enquired about a planned replacement programme on an unknown date. By this point 2 years had passed since the resident first raised concerns.
14. Within its stage 2 response the landlord accepted it had delayed and apologised. It also admitted it had previously failed to raise the repair to replace the window. It also accepted there had been issues with previous no accesses and whether it had told her about appointments in advance. Positively it said it had raised a new repair, but this was incorrect. It also paid £850 compensation for its failings in handling all her repairs. In relation to the failures identified, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. As the landlord has failed to complete the window replacement it is clear it has not resolved the complaint. The landlord failed to communicate with the resident or follow up with the replacement, which caused her to chase it. At the date of this report the window is still yet to be replaced, over 3 years after she first reported it. The resident said it measured the window for replacement the week of 17 November 2025.
15. There was severe maladministration. The resident has endured over 3 years of worry, distress, inconvenience, time and trouble in trying to get the issue resolved. To reflect the substantial impact this has had on her an order has been made that the landlord pay £2,000 compensation. This amount is in line with our guidance on remedies for severe failings which has caused serious detriment, with repeated landlord failings, over a long period of time. The resident has told us she is in debt due to her energy usage in trying to keep the property warm for her children. While we cannot determine liability for increase in energy usage, we have reflected the additional distress this has caused the resident within our compensation order.

16. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord is responsible for installations for the supply of water, which includes taps. When the resident raised a repair for her kitchen tap in August 2022 the landlord completed it the following day which was positive. When she reported it again August 2023 there is confusion within the landlord’s records. It says it attended as an emergency repair, then there was later no access under a different repair, then a no access for a follow-on repair from the emergency. Following the resident’s stage 1 complaint it raised a new repair on 14 February 2024. Within its stage 2 response it said it completed the repair on 22 April 2024.
17. The landlord’s record keeping is poor and there is no evidence the landlord followed its process for no accesses, which is a failing. It also accepted within its stage 2 response that it may not have informed the resident about all repair appointments in advance.
18. While the landlord did complete the repair, this was far outside any notion of within a reasonable timeframe. The resident has also told us the member of staff who attended was a joiner and not a plumber, which the landlord accepted within its stage 2 response. She said the wrong type of tap was fitted, it wobbles and cannot be fully turned off. The landlord did not provide the high level of workmanship it said it would under its repairs policy.
19. There was maladministration, which caused inconvenience, time and trouble for the resident. To reflect this impact an order has been made that the landlord pay £100 compensation to the resident.

20. When the resident reported a hole in her bath, possibly meaning the enamel, the landlord correctly accepted responsibility and raised a repair. It said it completed this on 27 October 2022, within 13 working days, which was within a reasonable timeframe. However, this repair was not included within its records which is a record keeping failing. The day the resident made her stage 1 complaint it booked an appointment to inspect the bath for 2 February 2024 but failed to attend.
21. The landlord rebooked the inspection for 14 February 2024, the day it provided its stage 1 response. The landlord has not provided any evidence of its inspection which is a failing. In an internal email on 22 February 2024 it noted the resident “wants a new bathroom” but does not say whether any repairs were needed. There is no evidence it updated the resident following the inspection, or managed her expectations, which was a failing. It should have told her the outcome.
22. Positively within its stage 2 response the landlord said it would complete a full overhaul of the bathroom, which it did on an unknown date between January and March 2025, some months after its stage 2 response. The resident has told us about, and provided photographs of, the quality of the work which she said is poor. The photographs a appear to show sharp edges or exposed screws, poor quality fittings, and poorly applied sealant.
23. There was maladministration. The landlord’s record keeping and communication was poor. It did not explain the outcome of its inspection or follow up with the resident until her stage 2 complaint. It delayed in carrying out works as part of the complaint resolution and the works appear to be of poor quality. This has caused inconvenience, worry, time and trouble for the resident. To reflect the impact an order has been made that the landlord pay £200 compensation to her.

24. Under the landlord’s complaints policy it will acknowledge stage 1 and 2 complaints within 2 working days. It will respond at stage 1 within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20 working days. The policy also makes provision for requesting an extension of time when needed. The policy is compliant with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
25. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 1 complaint within its policy timeframe. It provided its response just outside its policy timeframe but otherwise met the requirements of the Code. It also appropriately apologised and offered £20 compensation.
26. The landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s escalation request until after her third request, which was a significant failing. It took 147 working days to do so from the date of her first request, which was not in line with its policy and was an unacceptable delay. However, it then provided its stage 2 response 15 working days after its acknowledgement. It correctly recognised and apologised for its failings and offered £150 compensation. This was reasonable redress. No recommendation has been made as the landlord has already paid this compensation to the resident.

Learning

27. The landlord failed to understand or respond to the resident’s concerns about her window. It should recognise the potential hazard and have a mechanism for prioritising repairs and replacements to respond to such hazards. Equally, it should reconsider its approach to simply closing repairs following a single no access. These issues will be especially important now that Awaab’s Law is in force.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

28. The landlord should improve its record keeping. Its repair records should provide clear completion dates and explanations. Contractor notes and before and after photographs would also aid in this. Additionally, it should record no accesses including evidence that it has followed all steps of its no access process.

Communication

29. The landlord should improve its communication with residents around reported repairs, no accesses, and inspection outcomes. It should not require a resident to make a complaint to be provided with an outcome to repair requests.