Peabody Trust (202318251)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202318251

Peabody Trust

28 July 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 the resident’s concerns about the kitchen upgrade and the conduct of contractors at the property.

Background

2. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord. The property is a 3-bedroom flat. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. In mid-July 2023 contractors working on behalf of the landlord started kitchen renovations at the property.
3. On 1 September 2023 the resident made a complaint to the landlord about the kitchen renovation. The main points were:
   1. the length of time the renovations were taking.
   2. the contractors were “rude” and had damaged several items including a TV, sofas and other furniture.
   3. there were many hazards in the flat including sharp items being left on the floor.
   4. some work had to be done again as kitchen cupboards had been damaged and not fitted properly.
4. On 4 October 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. The landlord apologised for the negative experience the resident had experienced. It said there was an ongoing investigation regarding the alleged damage caused to her items. The landlord added the outstanding repairs, and snagging items had been completed, and the resident had confirmed her satisfaction with the completed work as of 15 September 2023.
5. The landlord assured the resident that, following its merger with another housing association, it had put in place substantial changes to its ways of working. It also said it had implemented robust process and policy changes, particularly in relation to repairs and complaints. It offered the resident compensation of £350 made up of £200 for the delay in issuing the stage 1 complaint response and £150 for the time, trouble and inconvenience she had experienced in relation to the kitchen renovation.
6. The resident escalated the complaint on 9 October 2023 on the grounds that the compensation was too low.
7. On 29 December 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The main points were:
   1. the contractors had offered £150 for the cleaning of the carpet in the living area and agreed to pay for a replacement internet cable.
   2. the contractors had denied placing the washing machine on the sofa.
   3. it had identified slight problems with the electrical setup and, whilst it did not have any reason to believe that it was potentially dangerous, it considered the electrical work was not completed to as good a standard as it would expect.
   4. there had been service failures in the initial standard of workmanship with the kitchen installation, but it had not been able to find evidence of poor attitude/behaviour from the staff the resident had dealt with or verify her claims regarding the damaged items.
   5. it would review the handling of this case so that it could scrutinise the workmanship of its contractors.
   6. it increased its compensation offer to £500 for the time, trouble and inconvenience relating to the kitchen repairs.
8. When the resident approached us, she said that the landlord’s compensation offer was “inadequate”. She described a sharp metal strip across the entrance to the kitchen that caused “severe injuries” to their feet. She said also that the damaged worktop continued to pose a risk, leading to injuries to their hands. She said the landlord had refused to take action. The resident went on to say that the oven was not fitted properly and stuck out. She added the cooker hood and fan were insufficient, resulting in excessive moisture in the kitchen which caused the ceiling to be wet and drip down on them when they were cooking.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

9. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues that have completed the landlord’s formal complaints procedure. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the involvement of this Service. It is not clear that the resident’s concerns that she raised with us recently about the kitchen have been brought to the attention of the landlord. While we have made a recommendation for the landlord to take action in relation to these matters, this investigation will focus on the issues the resident complained to the landlord about in September 2023.
10. The resident mentions that they have suffered health conditions and injuries as a result of renovations to the kitchen. We are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. However, we can consider any distress and inconvenience the resident may have experienced as a result of failings by the landlord as well as the way it responded to concerns about her health.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the kitchen upgrade and the conduct of contractors at the property

11. The landlord has acknowledged that there had been several failings in its handling of the kitchen renovations, namely, the initial standard of workmanship and that electrical work was not completed to a satisfactory standard.
12. When the resident reported that her furniture had been damaged by the contractors in her complaint, the landlord asked the contractors to investigate. They did so and wrote to the resident in October 2023. It was reasonable for the contractors to pay to clean the carpet in the living room and to offer to reimburse the cost of a damaged internet cable. However, in relation to the damaged items they said they considered the TV to be “functional” and had not been damaged during the works. They also said that their contractors had not placed appliances on the sofas or chair.
13. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said that it had not been able to verify the resident’s claims regarding the damaged items. It is not clear what action the landlord took to investigate this. While the contractors denied placing the appliances on the sofa and chair, the landlord had some evidence that supported her claim. We note the landlord’s senior project manager visited the resident while the works were ongoing. We have seen internal emails dated 11 and 13 September 2023 where they described these visits and noted in both emails that they had seen the new appliances placed on the chair and sofa. We have not seen evidence that the landlord challenged the contractors assertion, which would have been a fair and reasonable step to take. The statement in the stage 2 complaint response therefore appeared to be misleading or required explanation as why the appliances seen on the sofa and chair were not put there by the contractors. The landlord’s readiness to go along with the contractors’ statement without further scrutiny here was a failing.
14. In January 2024 the landlord gave the resident details of its insurance team. It would have been appropriate for it to have done so when the damaged items were first raised, rather than some 4 months later. The liability insurance company is a separate organisation from the landlord and the landlord is not responsible for the insurer’s decision or the claims process, aside from passing on the details of how to claim to the resident. If compensation for the sofa and chair has not been resolved through an insurance claim, the landlord should now consider reimbursing the resident for the cost of these damaged items taking into account the evidence dated 11 and 13 September 2023.
15. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it had not been able to find evidence of poor attitude/behaviour from the staff in relation to the resident’s assertion that the contractors had been rude. The landlord has failed to provide any evidence of an investigation into the resident’s concerns. This is a serious failing. We would expect the landlord to find out details of residents concerns and investigate by interviewing the appropriate persons and providing an outcome to the resident. Where the staff member is a contractor, it is still the landlord’s responsibility to investigate as the contractor is the landlord’s representative, and the contractor is required to comply with the landlord’s standards of conduct.
16. The landlord should have a clear process for how complaints about poor behaviour, bullying, or discrimination will be investigated. We have made a recommendation for the landlord to consider including details of this in its complaints policy or procedure.
17. The landlord offered the resident compensation of £500 for the inconvenience, frustration and distress in relation to the kitchen renovations. It also took some learning from the complaint and said it would review the handling of this case so that it could scrutinise the workmanship of its contractors. We have made an order for the landlord to share the outcome of that review with us and the resident.
18. Where the landlord has accepted it has made errors, it is our role to consider whether the redress it offered put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
19. Additional compensation of £450 is appropriate for the further failings identified in this report, namely:
    1. failure to properly investigate the resident’s claims about the contractors putting new appliances on the sofa and chair.
    2. failure to provide details of its liability insurer or insurance team promptly.
    3. lack of proper investigation into the resident’s concerns about the contractors’ behaviour.

Determination

20. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s concerns about the kitchen upgrade and the conduct of contractors at the property.

Orders

21. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
    1. apologise in writing to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. pay the resident the sum of £950 (minus any sums already paid) in recognition of the impact of the failings identified in its complaint handling and in this report. It should pay this sum direct to the resident and not offset against arrears where they exist.
    3. consider reimbursing the resident for the damaged sofa and chair taking into account the evidence dated 11 and 13 September 2023 (if this has not resolved through an insurance claim).
    4. share the outcome of its review into the handling of this case (which included the workmanship of its contractors) with us and the resident.

Recommendations

22. We recommend the landlord should take the following action:
    1. visit the property to inspect the issues that the resident raised with us (that is, the metal strip across the entrance to the kitchen; the damaged worktop; the poorly fitted oven; and the excessive moisture in the kitchen). The landlord should identify the appropriate repairs and write to the resident with details of how and when it will resolve these matters.
    2. Consider including in its complaints policy or procedure details of how it will investigate complaints about poor behaviour, bullying or discrimination.