Peabody Trust (202214584)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202214584

Peabody Trust

12 July 2023

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Cyclical repair works to the resident’s property including a kitchen and bathroom refit.
2. The associated complaint.

Background

The resident holds an assured shorthold tenancy with the landlord. The property is a one bedroomed flat. The resident has a young child.
On 7 March 2022, cyclical works to the resident’s property began. The works included renewal of the kitchen including the replacement of all white goods, renewal of the bathroom including the replacement of the shower and retiling, installing new flooring, decorating throughout the property, and upgrading the electrics.
The resident moved his furniture and belongings into one room so that the contractors could lay new flooring. The resident gave the contractors a set of his keys as he worked shifts and would not always be able to let the contractors in. The resident told the contractors he would be away from the property between 7 March 2022 and 17 March 2022.
Between 29 March 2022 and 3 May 2022, the resident contacted the contractor for updates. On 3 May 2022, the contractor informed the resident that the landlord had completed the inspection of the property and that he could move back in.
The resident submitted a stage one complaint to the landlord on 3 August 2022. He said that:
1. The works had taken two and half months.
2. He had had to seek temporary accommodation during this time as he could not live in his property and had not been offered alternative accommodation by the landlord.
3. He had told the landlord about the issues and had sent photos and messages to the contractor.
4. He wanted the landlord to reimburse him for the rent and utility bills he had paid while the works were being carried out. He also asked that the landlord compensate him for the time that he had lived in temporary accommodation and for the stress of having to chase for updates.
On 11 August 2022, the landlord issued a stage one complaint response. It apologised to the resident and said that:
1. It would not agree to award the full rent due on the property as it had been the resident’s decision to leave the property. However, it said it understood why he had made the decision to move out and agreed to pay the resident 50% of his weekly rent for the period 9 March 2022-28 April 2022, a sum of £630.69.
2. It offered the resident £500 in compensation for time, trouble, and inconvenience.
3. It agreed to award the resident £150 for poor complaint handling.
4. It would improve communications with residents and the quality of work carried out, ensuring that this was completed on time.
The resident escalated his complaint to stage two of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 21 August 2022. He reiterated the points he had made in his initial complaint and asked that the landlord compensate him for rent and utilities for March 2022-May 2022. In addition, he asked for 11 weeks rent in compensation for time, trouble, and inconvenience as well as further compensation for poor complaint handling and stress. He asked for £5465.39 compensation in total.
The landlord contacted the resident to say that the contractors had not been able to complete work on the bedroom as it was full of furniture. The resident responded to say that he had not been able to move the furniture out of the bedroom, as there were no rooms that were ready for him to move the furniture into when he returned from being out of the country on 17 March 2022. The resident provided date stamped photos to the landlord showing unfinished works in the property.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 26 September 2022, to say it needed more time to investigate his stage two complaint and said it would provide a complaint response within ten days.
On 4 October 2022, the landlord issued its stage two complaint response. It apologised to the resident and said that:
1. It was evident from the photos provided by the resident that his home was temporarily uninhabitable. Therefore, in accordance with its decant policy. it would offer the resident £100 per week for the period 7 March 2022 – 3 May 2022 (a total of £800).
2. It would not compensate the resident for his utility bills as had it offered the resident temporary accommodation, it would have covered the cost of the utilities at the temporary accommodation, whilst the resident would have been expected to continue paying the rent and utility bills at his property.
3. To reflect the distress and inconvenience of the resident having to stay with a friend, it offered £600 compensation.
4. For failing to communicate with the resident effectively, the resident having to chase for updates as to when his home was ready to move back into, and for failing to return his spare key, it offered £500 compensation.
5. It said it had not identified any significant delays in its complaint handling, however, it had identified a lack of investigation at stage one of its complaint process, therefore it offered £150 for failures in complaint handling.
On 6 October 2022, the landlord increased its compensation for the time the resident had not been able to live at the property, from £800 to £1100.
The resident complained to the Ombudsman about the landlord’s handling of the works to his home and its handling of his complaint. He reiterated his request that the landlord pay him £5465.39.

Assessment

Policies and procedures

The landlord’s decant policy sets out its approach to temporarily moving residents during repairs. The policy states that:
1. When extensive works which cannot be carried out with the resident in the property due to significant redevelopments or refurbishments, it may be necessary for residents to move to suitable alternative accommodation. The policy states that each case will be assessed on an individual basis.
2. Temporary decants will not normally be considered where the works are part of the landlord’s internal investment programme.
3. Residents will continue to pay rent and service charges for their permanent home.
4. If the tenant is able to stay with family or friends for the duration of the works, the landlord may make a payment to the resident in recognition of the inconvenience of a temporary decant as follows: £50 per week for a one-bedroom property, £75 per week for a two-bedroom property, £100 per week for a property with three bedrooms or above.
The landlord’s complaint process has two stages. At stage one, a response will be provided within 10 working days. At stage two, a response will be provided within 20 working days. If an extension of time is needed at either stage, the procedure states that the landlord will tell the resident why this is needed and agree an extended timeframe.

The landlord’s handling of cyclical works to the property

The resident has told this Service that he was asked to choose new units a number of years ago, however works were postponed and then set back again due to Covid-19. He said he did not receive any information prior to the kitchen and bathroom refurbishment works starting in March 2022, only a phone call from the contractors letting him know the date the works were due to start.
Internal correspondence between the landlord and the contractors refers to a survey of the property being carried out and timescales for the works being provided to the resident. This Service has asked the landlord to provide all the information it provided to the resident prior to work starting. The landlord has not been able to provide this, which points to poor record keeping.
The landlord acted unreasonably in failing to adequately inform the resident what works were going to be carried out, how long these works would take, and what disruption these were likely to cause him, particularly given that the resident had a young child. This will have caused time, trouble, and inconvenience for the resident as he was initially informed by the contractors that the work would take ten days to complete. The landlord has offered £500 for its failures in communicating with the resident, which is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) which states that where maladministration has been identified which adversely affected the resident, £100-£600 compensation should be considered. Therefore, the landlord has offered proportionate redress for its failures in this regard.
The landlord has acted appropriately in offering the resident £1100 for the 11 weeks he was not living at the property. This is in line with its decant policy, set out above, which states that where residents are able to stay with family or friends, the landlord will consider a payment in recognition of this. The landlord’s decant policy says that if the property is a one bedroomed flat, it will offer the resident £50 for each week they stay with family or friends. It has offered the resident £100 per week, £50 per week more than its policy sets out.
Furthermore, it has offered the resident £600 for the inconvenience of having to stay with a friend. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, set out above, which states that £100-£600 compensation should be offered where maladministration has been identified. Therefore, the landlord has made an appropriate offer and does not need to do anything further in this regard.
The landlord has acted reasonably in not reimbursing the resident for his rent and utility bills for the period he was staying with a friend. This is because under the terms of his tenancy agreement, the resident is legally obliged to pay rent and utility bills and the landlord has already offered appropriate compensation for the time he was unable to live in his property in accordance with its decant policy.
The landlord has acted reasonably for apologising for its mistakes in this case. It has offered £2200 compensation which the Ombudsman considers was proportionate to the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused by its failures in the handling of the cyclical works to the kitchen and bathroom, the replacement of the flooring and redecoration.

Handling of the associated complaint

The landlord responded to the resident’s initial complaint in line with its published timescales. There was a two-week delay in the landlord responding to the resident’s stage two complaint. The landlord acted appropriately in writing to the resident to ask for an extension of ten days to respond. This was in line with its complaint procedure and the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (published on our website) which states that landlords can request an extension of up to ten working days to respond to complaints as long as they inform the resident. The landlord was a few days late in requesting this extension, it should have requested this extension prior to the complaint response becoming due. However, this was a slight delay and will have only caused the resident minor inconvenience.
The landlord has acknowledged that it over relied on the information provided by its contractor when investigating the complaint at stage one of its procedure. It was appropriate that it offered the resident £150 compensation for this, to reflect the time the resident spent escalating his complaint. As above, this amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance. Therefore, the landlord does not need to do anything further in this regard.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of cyclical works to the resident’s property including a kitchen and bathroom refit, satisfactorily.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of the associated complaint, satisfactorily.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord review its record keeping, to ensure it retains copies of any information provided to residents about cyclical works.