Paragon Asra Housing Limited (202219733)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202219733

Paragon Asra Housing Limited

23 May 2024

 

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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Reports of issues with windows.
    2. Reports of a pest infestation.
    3. Reports of boiler issues.
    4. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy. The property is a first floor flat.
  2. The resident reported problems with his windows in both 2017 and 2019. On both occasions the landlord was unable to complete works due to access issues. On 25 November 2021 the resident reported a leak from his boiler. The landlord resolved this on 3 March 2022.
  3. The resident made a new report about the state of his windows in July 2022. On 15 July 2022 the landlord inspected and noted that the windows in question were ‘badly rotted’ and needed to be replaced. The landlord performed follow up visits on 17 August 2022 and 18 October 2022 to measure the windows and order the necessary materials.
  4. The resident raised a complaint about the state of his property on 27 November 2022. He said that the serious draft caused by the windows was making the property cold and this had created mould surrounding the windows. He added that this had been ongoing for several years and the landlord had failed to rectify the situation. He also mentioned that he was unhappy with the time it had taken the landlord to previously fix the boiler. He also reported that the property had mice.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the following day. It undertook two further visits to measure the windows in December 2022. The resident continued to chase the landlord about the issue through December 2022 and January 2023.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 20 January 2023. The landlord upheld the complaint, awarding the resident £488 compensation. This consisted of £300 compensation for the delays in getting the windows replaced, £136 for its delays in repairing the boiler (£10 for the first day and £2 a day for the following 64 days) and £52 for the delays in providing its stage 1 complaint response (£2 a day for 26 days). The landlord confirmed that it was in the process of getting the window replacement works approved, and that an order had been raised for a pest controller to visit the property and perform a treatment.
  7. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process on 2 February 2023. He felt the landlord had not addressed his complaint or report that his property was not suitable to live in. The landlord had not provided him with compensation for this or the fact he would need to leave the property whilst works were completed. He also felt that he had reported the mice infestation to the landlord at an earlier stage.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint process on 3 June 2023. It awarded £110 for the delay in providing its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord confirmed that pest controllers had visited on 12 April 2023 but found no evidence of pests but did leave bait traps. It confirmed it would follow up on any new reports the resident made. It advised that its new contractors would be visiting the resident on 7 June 2023 about replacing the windows, whilst the landlord would perform a mould wash in the meantime. Overall, the landlord raised its compensation to £782. This consisted of £162 for complaint delays, £320 for its failures in handling the boiler issues, and £300 for the delay in replacing the windows.
  9. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 24 August 2023, asking us to consider his complaint. He said he was unhappy that he was still having to pay rent each month whilst the issues he had reported were unresolved. He said to resolve his complaint he wanted the landlord to acknowledge responsibility, provide a fair offer of compensation based on the history of the issues, and to either complete the repairs or offer him alternative accommodation.

Assessment and findings

The scope of our investigation

  1. The Ombudsman expects that complaints are made to landlords within a reasonable period of time from the event occurring, usually within 12 months. In this instance, the resident reported issues with his windows in both 2017 and 2019. The landlord’s response to these reports have therefore not been considered as part of this investigation. They have, however, been noted as part of the wider context of the issue.

The landlord’s handling of reports of issues with windows

  1. The landlord’s maintenance policy has 3 different priorities for repairs. At priority 1 (emergency repairs) the landlord aims to make safe any issues within 4 hours and rectify them within 24 hours. At priority 2 (non-emergency repairs) the work is to be completed within 15 working days. Priority 3 relates to variable timescale repairs. These are repairs where multiple visits are required. In this instance, the landlord says it will talk through what it intends to do, agree timescales and project manage the work through to completion.
  2. The landlord undertook several visits to the resident’s property. During these, it measured up the windows on 4occasions –in August 2022, October 2022 and twice in December 2022. Beyond this, the landlord does not appear to have taken any further action towards replacing the windows. The work order has been raised but no further progress towards replacing the windows was taken between July 2022 (when the windows were inspected and confirmed as beyond repair) and March 2024.
  3. One reason for the landlord’s delays was due to a change in contractors, as a previous works contract expired. This should not have had an adverse affect on the resident, nor caused any delay in performing the window replacement. It is the landlord’s responsibility to manage its resources and to ensure that repairs are completed in a timely manner. The landlord’s failure to properly plan for the end of its contract contributed towards additional delays and distress for the resident.
  4. The landlord recognised failings in its handling of the replacement and offered the resident £300 compensation in its complaint responses for these. It also said in both its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses that it was in the process of completing the necessary works. At stage 1, it said it was awaiting authorisation for these repairs, whilst at stage 2 it said it was employing new contractors to visit and perform the works.
  5. From the most recent evidence provided to the Ombudsman, the windows have still not been replaced. This is now over 20 months since the resident’s first visit where its contractors confirmed that the windows needed repair. The landlord committed in both its stage 1 and its stage 2 complaint responses to replace the windows as per these recommendations. The landlord’s failure to complete these repairs represented maladministration.
  6. The resident has sought for the landlord to waive his rental liability. It is not within the remit of the Ombudsman to order that rent not be charged to a resident and there is no evidence that the property was rendered uninhabitable by the repairs and pest control matters considered through this investigation.
  7. However, for failing to fulfil its commitments, the landlord should pay the resident £800, inclusive of its previous offer of £300. This figure is in line with the remedies guidance for a failure which had a significant impact on a resident.
  8. As part of its response to the resident’s window reports, the landlord undertook a mould wash of a damp patch. However, as stated above, it has failed to rectify the substantive cause of the mould. This likely means that damp and mould has resurfaced in the property. The landlord therefore needs to arrange for a new damp and mould survey of the property and to provide the resident with a timescale for performing a new mould wash if necessary, or any required remedial works caused by its delays in replacing the window.
  9. The landlord should also contact the resident to provide him with a timescale for beginning the replacement of the windows. It should provide him with a full schedule of works, detailing the timescales for this work to be completed. It should also provide him with a named contact who will be overseeing these works to ensure the resident is able to discuss any concerns directly.

The landlord’s handling of reports of boiler issues

  1. The resident reported a leak in his property on 25 November 2021. Leaks, under the landlord’s maintenance policy, would generally be classed as a priority 1, or emergency repair. The landlord fulfilled the commitment in its policy by attending to the leak on the same day. However, whilst attending to the leak, the boiler was shut off resulting in the resident losing hot water and heating.
  2. The maintenance policy lists loss of hot water and heating as a priority 1 repair. This means that the landlord should have followed up to rectify the issue and to get the boiler running again within 24 hours. The landlord’s follow up appointment was first made on 24 December 2021, leaving the resident without heating and hot water for a month before an appointment was attempted.
  3. It took the landlord until 3 March 2022 to get the boiler working again. This left the resident without heating and hot water for 98 calendar days. To leave a resident without heating for this period of time represented a serious failure in service from the landlord.
  4. The landlord has provided evidence that on several occasions its contractors were unable to access the property to perform the repairs. This happened on 24 December 2021, 30 December 2021, 1 January 2022, and 10 January 2022. The landlord has not, however, provided evidence that it contacted the resident prior to the appointments to arrange access. The Ombudsman would expect the landlord to contact the resident to confirm an appointment and provide evidence as such in case of an Ombudsman investigation.
  5. The landlord recognised in its complaint responses that it had failed to respond to the boiler issues in a reasonable timeframe. In its stage 2 complaint response, it provided the resident with £320 compensation for its failings. Given the distress and inconvenience the boiler breakdown caused to the resident, this represents a reasonable offer of redress from the landlord. This amount is broadly in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for service failures of this nature. If the landlord has not already paid this to the resident, it should reoffer this amount.
  6. It is also recommended that the landlord consider its record-keeping around the arrangement of appointments. The landlord should be able to fully document the steps it took in arranging appointments and be able to provide the Ombudsman with a full audit trail of these steps.

The landlord’s handling of reports of a pest infestation

  1. The landlord does not have a specific policy which details how it intends to handle pest infestations, or its timescales for doing so. The Ombudsman would therefore expect the landlord to treat such matters broadly in line with the timescales specified in its repairs policy, depending on the severity of the issue.
  2. The resident and the landlord dispute the date that mice were first reported. The earliest evidence the Ombudsman has seen is from the resident raising this when making his complaint on 27 November 2022. The resident believes this issue was raised at an earlier date but the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence to confirm or deny this.
  3. Given the lack of available evidence, this investigation therefore accepts that the landlord was first made aware of the issue on 27 November 2022.
  4. The landlord’s contractors initially visited at the end of January 2023. However, they confirmed to the landlord in later correspondence that there was an administrative error which meant that no follow up was carried out. The follow up visit was then carried out on 16 April 2023.
  5. The landlord’s contractors advised that there was a light infestation, for which they put down bait traps. The landlord also provided the resident with details on how to report any new incidents. This was a proportionate response from the landlord.
  6. The landlord’s failure to ensure a follow up appointment was completed represented service failure. As per its repairs policy, the landlord would be expected to project manage any issues where external contractors are required. For its failure to do so, the landlord should provide the resident with £50 compensation. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which recommends amounts in this region for a ‘minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided’.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy has 2 stages. At stage 1, it says it will aim to provide its complaint response within 10 working days. At stage 2, it says it will aim to provide its complaint response within 20 working days. The landlord recognises that there are times when it may be unable to provide its response within these timescales, and states that when this is the case it will inform residents of the need for any extensions.
  2. At stage 1 of the complaints process, the landlord received the resident’s complaint on 27 November 2022, and provided its response 37 working days later. The landlord recognised its failure in service, offering the resident £52 compensation for this delay, providing £2 a day for the 26-day delay.
  3. At stage 2 of the complaints process, the landlord took 83 working days to provide its complaint response, significantly outside of the timescales specified in its complaints policy. The landlord awarded a further £110 for this delay.
  4. Overall, the landlord’s offer of compensation was a reasonable offer of redress considering the level of distress and inconvenience its complaint handling delays caused the resident. This amount is broadly in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which recommends amounts in this range where the landlord’s failure has ‘adversely affected the resident’.
  5. If the landlord has not already paid this amount to the resident, it is recommended that it reoffer this to him.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of issues with the resident’s windows.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of reports of issues with the resident’s boiler.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of reports of a pest infestation.
  4. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. It is ordered that within 4 weeks of the date of this letter, the landlord:
    1. Pay the resident £850 compensation for its failings in handling the pest infestation and the replacement of his windows. This is inclusive of its previous offer of £300 for service failure relating to the window replacement. This amount should be paid direct to the resident and not offset against any arrears.
    2. Write to the resident to provide a start date for the window replacement works and a full schedule for these being completed. The landlord should also provide the resident with a named contact who will be overseeing and managing this work.
    3. Contact the resident to arrange a damp and mould inspection. Any mould washes or recommended remedial works should be completed within the timescales specified in the landlord’s repairs policy.
    4. Apologise to the resident for failing to fulfil its commitments to replace the affected windows.
    5. Provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has completed the above.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should, if it has not already paid this, reoffer the £162 compensation for its complaint handling failures, and £320 for the delays in repairing the resident’s boiler.
  2. The landlord should review its record-keeping practices to ensure it is able to provide a full record of any contact made with residents relating to repairs and pest control appointments.