Places for People Group Limited (202220704)

A blue and grey text

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220704

Places for People Group Limited

12 March 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

This complaint is about the landlord’s response to:
1. The resident’s reports of repairs to their bathroom.
2. The resident’s concerns that the communal gardens and bin areas were not being regularly maintained and fly tipping.
3. The resident’s concerns about the standard of the communal cleaning at their block.
This complaint is also about the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

The resident is a joint assured tenant of the landlord. The tenancy commenced on 13 November 2006.
On 28 November 2022, the resident emailed the landlord to complain about repairs to their bathroom. The resident said that the bathroom needed a new floor and referred to ‘decay’ to the plasterwork and tiling. The resident also complained about the communal cleaning, that the garden and bin areas were ‘disgusting’ and that rats had been seen.
The resident contacted us on 7 June 2023 to advise that they had escalated their complaint on 10 December 2022 but had not received a response. We then wrote to the landlord on 12 June 2023, to ask that it provide its stage 2 response within the following 5 working days. We confirmed that the complaint concerned its handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of bathroom repairs.
2. Reports that the communal garden was not regularly maintained resulting in fly tipping.
3. Concerns that they were paying a service charge for a weekly caretaker who was not attending.
The landlord wrote to the resident to acknowledge his complaint on 14 June 2023. The landlord said the resident’s earlier complaint had been resolved at the ‘put it right’ stage. The landlord also contacted us on 14 June 2023 to advise that it had not yet responded at stage 1 and that this would be issued by 26 June 2023.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 23 June 2023 in which it said:
1. With regards to the repairs to the resident’s bathroom:
  1. Following a leak in their bathroom, remedial works were required to the flooring and walls.
  2. It raised an inspection on 16 September 2022, but the operative reported ‘no access’ and that the resident’s phone ‘just kept ringing’.
  3. A further appointment was arranged on Saturday 22 October 2022, for the resident’s convenience. The operative that attended reported:

(1) The bathroom had no vinyl flooring and the floor needed attention following a leak.

(2) The floor was not caving in, hardboard and vinyl were suggested.

(3) There was no bathroom door and the bath panel needed replacing.

(4) The bathroom wall had not been filled nor re-plastered when the waste had been taken off. This left a hole between the bathroom and toilet walls.

Follow up appointments were arranged for 7 and 27 February 2023 but on both occasions its operatives were unable to gain access. The landlord confirmed that no further appointments had been arranged since 27 February 2023.
It would ask its scheduling department to contact the resident by 30 June 2023 to arrange a convenient time for the appointment to go ahead.
It was satisfied that it had followed its process and had attempted to attend to carry out the required remedial works to the bathroom. The landlord apologised if there had been some confusion but it could not see that it had failed to attend an agreed appointment.

With regards to the communal gardens and bin areas not being regularly maintained, resulting in fly tipping:
1. It had spoken to its ‘landscapes’ team who confirmed that the garden was regularly maintained and fly tipping was an ongoing issue, which they tried to clear as soon as reported. The landlord said that the latest clearance was raised with its waste management contractor on 18 May 2023.
2. It acknowledged that ‘due to customer behaviour’ the bin area was a challenge to maintain. However, arrangements were being made to jet wash the area. The landlord said it had not received any previous reports of rats in the area from either residents or staff.
With regards to the communal cleaning, the previous caretaking service was no longer provided. The landlord said the site was attended twice a week and cleaning audits were completed on each visit and recorded on its system.

On 25 June 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to escalate their complaint. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 27 June 2023 and confirmed that it would provide its final response by 25 July 2023, which it did.
In its stage 2 response of 25 July 2023, the landlord said:
1. There had been no service failure with regards to the repairs to the resident’s bathroom:
  1. Appointments were booked for 7 and 27 February 2023, but on both occasions, operatives were unable to gain access.
  2. In its telephone conversation with the resident on 18 July 2023, the resident had advised that they had changed their mobile number. It had no record of the resident informing it of this change, which lead to repair appointment texts being sent to the resident’s old number. It had now updated its records, which would resolve the issue of the resident not receiving repair appointment texts in the future.
  3. 2 appointments had been arranged for 18 July and 10 August 2023, to complete the outstanding works to the bathroom.
2. There had been no service failure with regards to the maintenance of the communal gardens and bin areas, and fly tipping:
  1. Reports of fly-tipping were dealt with as they occurred.
  2. Fly tipping was a national issue, and it was working to minimise the impact on residents as well as identifying perpetrators.
  3. Members of its neighborhoods’ team and places management met on site on the 19 July 2023 to explore options to improve the layout and security of the bin area. The landlord said this would be progressed in the coming weeks.
  4. It had also been working with the local authority in recent months, which had resulted in provision of extra general waste bins and recycling bins for the site.
3. There had been no service failure with regards to the standard of the communal cleaning at their block:
  1. It had been provided with audit logs that show the operatives were attending on a regular basis.
  2. It had discussed the quality of the cleaning service with its contract manager and had been informed that the resource allocated to the resident’s site was currently being reviewed. It was the intention that this resource would be increased soon.
4. With regard to its complaint handling, it acknowledged that the resident’s escalation request of 10 December 2022 was not acknowledged nor any action taken. The landlord apologised for this and offered the resident £50 for this failure.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case. When considering the landlord’s handling of the matter, the Ombudsman is guided by the landlord’s policies and procedures and our own Dispute Resolution Principles, which are:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair process.
2. Put things right.
3. Learn from outcomes.
In determining whether there has been service failure or maladministration we consider both the events that initially prompted a complaint and the landlord’s response to those events. The extent to which a landlord has recognised any shortcomings and the appropriateness of any steps taken to offer redress can be as relevant as the original mistake or service failure.
We would not propose a remedy of compensation to reimburse a resident for their time off work, loss of wages or loss of employment whilst repairs are carried out. Whilst such works will inevitably cause some inconvenience to residents, their occupancy agreement will require them to give access for repairs to be carried out as needed. It would therefore not be fair or reasonable for the Ombudsman to order a landlord to pay a resident for loss of earnings for routine appointments.
However, there may be circumstances when the Ombudsman decides that it is appropriate to order a landlord to pay compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused. An example of this could be where the landlord fails to resolve a repair within a reasonable period of time.

Scope

In their correspondence to us on 16 August 2023, the resident referred to the issues with their bathroom being ongoing for around 8 years. Whilst we do not doubt the resident’s concerns, we cannot consider matters that were not raised with the landlord as a formal complaint within 12 months of those matters occurring.

Response to the resident’s reports of repairs to their bathroom

The landlord is obliged under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to complete repairs and to do so within a reasonable time. Once a landlord is informed of some damage or deterioration in a property, it is ‘on notice’ to carry out a reasonable inquiry to determine the cause and complete a repair. What is a reasonable time will depend on all the circumstances of a case.
In their email of 7 June 2023, the resident told us that the issues with their bathroom had been ongoing for approximately 4 months before they logged their complaint in November 2022.
This would align with the landlord raising a repair on 6 August 2022, following reports of ‘rotten flooring, plaster coming off the walls, mould on the walls and tiles being broken’ in the resident’s bathroom.
In accordance with the landlord’s responsive repairs policy, it was reasonable for it to log the reported repairs to the bathroom as ‘appointable’ repairs and to respond within a 28-day timescale. Given that the repair was raised on 6 August 2022, this would mean the landlord would have been expected to respond by 5 September 2022.
However, it did not attempt to carry out an inspection until 16 September 2022. The landlord’s records make no reference to the resident being advised of the appointment prior to its attendance on that day. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said its operative reported ‘no access’ and that the resident’s phone ‘just kept ringing’.
A further appointment was arranged on Saturday 22 October 2022 for the inspection to take place, for which access was provided. The landlord noted in its complaint response that this was arranged, on a Saturday, for the resident’s convenience. As the landlord was not obliged to provide appointments at the weekend, this shows that at this point it was trying to resolve the repair for the resident.
The inspection on 22 October 2022 confirmed there were repairs within the resident’s bathroom which were the landlord’s responsibility to resolve. Despite this we have seen no evidence of the landlord raising a job to complete the recommended works until 6 December 2022, over 2 months later. At this point some 4 months had passed since the resident reported the repair in August 2022.
There was then a further 2-month delay, with the landlord not arranging appointments until 7 and 27 February 2023. The landlord’s records on this occasion make reference to it leaving a voicemail message for the resident and sending them an email. We have not had sight of either the landlord’s call records nor the email it referred to.
In its stage 1 response the landlord said that it was unable to gain access on either 7 or 27 February 2023. However, it failed to make any reference to the length of time the resident had been waiting for the repair to be completed. It also made no reference to the 4-month period between 27 February 2023 and its stage 1 response of 23 June 2023 where it had taken no action.
We have seen no evidence of the resident being contacted by the landlord’s scheduling department, as the landlord had promised in its stage 1 response. However, the landlord did raise 2 new jobs on 26 June 2023 to repair the bathroom wall, to overboard the bathroom floor and to replace the bath panel.
It was not until 10 August 2023 that the repairs to the bathroom were finally completed, over a year after the landlord first raised the repair on 6 August 2022.
This was an excessive amount of time for the resident to have to wait for the repairs to be completed.
The complaints process provided the landlord with the opportunity to review how it had handled the repairs reported by the resident and to identify any failures in its service. However, it did not do so. The landlord made no reference to the length of time it had taken to complete the repair in either of its complaint responses nor did it acknowledge any failures on its part. Rather than reflecting on the length of time the resident had to wait and how its actions may have impacted this, the landlord sought to blame the delay solely on the lack of access.
This was not a reasonable approach for the landlord to take. Whilst it is not disputed that there were ‘no-access’ appointments on 16 September 2022, 7 February and 27 February 2023, landlords should have processes in place to follow up with residents to rearrange the appointment promptly.
It is acknowledged that the landlord’s repairs policy states that if “no access” occurs it will leave a card at the property to advise that the repair has been cancelled. The policy states that the resident must then contact the landlord to arrange another appointment. However, neither the landlord nor the resident make any reference to a card being left.
It has been noted that there was an issue with a change in the resident’s mobile number, which the landlord was not aware of until 18 July 2023. However, this alone does not explain the extensive delay, nor the lack of urgency shown by the landlord with regards to ensuring the repairs were completed. This is because contacting the resident by mobile was not the only method of contact available to it.
A no-access appointment would also not mean that the landlord was no longer obliged under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to complete the repair. This is confirmed in the landlord’s repairs policy which states that it will monitor no access visits to ensure a property does not fall into disrepair, which it did not do in this case.
Having considered the evidence, we are satisfied that there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of this element of the resident’s complaint. Whilst there were no access visits, the landlord failed to effectively monitor these. It also showed a lack of urgency in ensuring the repairs were completed within a reasonable period of time.
In fairness to the resident, and to put right the failings identified, the landlord has been ordered to apologise and pay them £300 compensation. This figure is in line with the amounts set out in our Remedies Guidance where there has been a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident and which the landlord failed to acknowledge or put right.
In addition to being fair to the resident and putting things right, we also expect landlords to learn from complaints made to them. As there is no evidence of it doing so a further order has been made for the landlord to review its handling of these repairs. This review is to include, why it took so long for it to complete the repairs, why it took no action at all between February 2023 and June 2023 and its monitoring of missed appointments.

Response to the resident’s concerns that the communal gardens and bin areas were not being regularly maintained and fly tipping

In their complaint of 28 November 2022, the resident raised concerns that the communal garden and bin areas were not being regularly maintained, resulting in fly tipping, and that rats had been seen. Given the concerns raised by the resident, the landlord was ‘on notice’ to carry out a reasonable investigation and to address any issues it identified as a result of that inquiry.
The landlord’s responsibility to do so is confirmed in its estate management policy which states:
1. It will take action to rectify any issues identified on a scheme in a timely fashion.
2. It will respond promptly to reports of vermin and pest infestation in common areas of buildings and arrange inspections to ensure the safety of resident’s and its properties.
To support the position taken by the landlord in its stage 1 regarding the communal garden and bin areas being regularly maintained, we asked it to provide the following evidence:
1. Any records concerning its investigation into the resident’s reports.
2. Communal ground keeping logs for the property.
3. Copies of any survey or inspection reports, or feedback from other employees or contractors.
Despite the landlord being advised in our correspondence of 3 September 2024 of its obligation to ‘provide copies (without charge) of any information requested by the Ombudsman’, it failed to provide any evidence in relation to the above.
Good record keeping is one of the fundamental aspects of housing management. Without it a landlord is often unable to support any claims it has made about the actions it has taken. It can also not evidence that it is meeting its obligations fairly and consistently. The landlord’s poor record keeping in this case has impacted on our ability to robustly assess whether it responded to the resident’s concerns fairly or in line with its policies.
Given the lack of accurate and comprehensive records and the unfairness to the resident as a result, a finding of maladministration has been made in respect of this element of the complaint.
To put this right the landlord has been ordered to apologise and pay the resident £100 compensation. It has also been ordered to:
1. Provide the resident with a copy of its most recent estate inspection report where the communal gardens and bin areas were inspected. If it has not carried out such an inspection in the last month, it is to do so within 28 calendar days of this report and provide a copy of its report to the resident.
2. Review its record keeping in relation to this element of the resident’s complaint. The landlord is to consider what actions it needs to take to ensure that, going forward, it maintains clear and comprehensive records and that these are readily available to the Ombudsman if requested.

Response to the resident’s concerns about the standard of the communal cleaning at their block

Given the concerns raised by the resident in their complaint of 28 November 2022, the landlord was ‘on notice’ to carry out a reasonable investigation into the resident’s concerns and to address any issues it found as a result.
The landlord’s estate management policy states that:
1. It will maintain the cleanliness of communal areas in its ownership in order to ensure the safety and well-being of users.
2. It will visit estates regularly based on risk and will take action to rectify any issues identified on a scheme in a timely fashion.
The landlord’s stage 1 response of 23 June 2023 was dismissive and failed to evidence it had carried out any meaningful investigation into the concerns raised by the resident. Instead, it simply stated that the previous caretaking service was no longer provided, the site was attended twice a week and cleaning audits were completed on each visit and recorded on its system.
It is evident from its stage 2 response that the landlord had reviewed the cleaning logs, which it said confirmed that operatives were attending on a regular basis. However, its response with regards to the standard of the cleaning carried out was not clear. This is because although it said there had been no failure in the service provided, it also said that the level of resources allocated were being reviewed with the intention of this being ‘increased soon.’ If the service were being provided to a reasonable standard, it would also be reasonable to question why additional resources would be necessary.
In order to allow us to review and clarify the landlord’s response with regards to this element of the complaint, we asked that it provide any records concerning its investigation into the resident’s concerns. These included:
1. Communal cleaning logs for the property.
2. All internal correspondence or contact notes regarding the resident’s concerns about the standard of cleaning/missed cleaning.
3. Copies of any survey or inspection reports, or feedback from other employees or contractors.
However, the only records we received in relation to our request for these specific pieces of evidence were:
1. Two pages of screenshots from the landlord’s Internal Cleaning Audit files, which list weekly attendance at the resident’s scheme between 19 April and 30 August (the year these entries relate to is not apparent from the records provided).
2. A table listing a number of locations with handwritten dates and either ticks or asterisks against each location.
Neither of these records give any indication of what works were carried out or whether these were carried out to the required standard.
Given the lack of accurate and comprehensive records, the impact this has had on our ability to investigate this element of the complaint and the unfairness to the resident as a result, a finding of maladministration has been made.
To put this right the landlord has been ordered to apologise and pay the resident an additional £100 compensation. It has also been ordered to:
1. Provide the resident with a copy of its most recent estate inspection report where the cleaning was inspected. If it has not carried out such an inspection in the last month, it is to do so within 28 calendar days of this report and provide a copy of its report to the resident.
2. Include its record keeping in relation to the communal cleaning, as part of the review previously ordered with regards to the communal gardens and bin areas at the resident’s scheme

Handling of the associated complaint

The resident logged their initial complaint on 28 November 2022. In accordance with its complaints process the landlord would have had the opportunity to seek to resolve the complaint within 24 hours under its ‘On-the-spot’ ‘put it right’ process.
However, as there is no evidence of the landlord taking any action with regards to the resident’s concerns until 6 December 2022, it could not reasonably be concluded that it had resolved the complaint within 24 hours.
The resident contacted the landlord again on 10 December 2022 as they were dissatisfied with its response. Given, as the landlord later advised, it had responded to the complaint under its ‘On-the-spot’ ‘put it right’ process, it would have been expected to have raised a stage 1 complaint at this point, but it did not do so.
Having had no response to their email of 10 December 2022, the resident contacted us on 7 June 2023 to seek our assistance in progressing his complaint. We then wrote to the landlord on 12 June 2023 asking that it provide its stage 2 response.
Following our contact, the landlord said that it had not previously responded at stage 1 of its complaints process as the complaint had been resolved at its ‘put it right’ stage. The landlord agreed to provide a stage 1 response. Having done so it would have been expected to provide this within 10 working days of being contacted by us. This it did, issuing its stage 1 response on 23 June 2023.
The resident escalated his complaint on 25 June 2023, which the landlord acknowledged on 27 June 2023 in accordance with the timeframes set out in its complaints policy. It would then have been expected to provide its stage 2 response within 20 working days. This it did, issuing its stage 2 on 25 July 2023.
In its final response, the landlord acknowledged that the resident’s escalation request of 10 December 2022 was not acknowledged nor was any action taken. The landlord apologised for this and offered the resident £50 for this failure. Whilst it is not disputed that the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s email of 10 December 2022, it is our view that the apology and offer of £50 compensation provided the resident with reasonable redress in this case.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to:
1. The resident’s reports of repairs to their bathroom.
2. The resident’s concerns that the communal gardens and bin areas were not being regularly maintained and fly tipping.
3. The resident’s concerns about the standard of the communal cleaning at their block
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord provided reasonable redress in respect of handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 28 calendar days of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified.
2. Pay the resident a total of £500 compensation. This is made up of:
  1. £300 for the distress and inconvenience as a result of the excessive amount of time they had to wait for the repairs to their bathroom to be completed.
  2. £100 for its record keeping failures with regards to the communal gardens and bin areas at the resident’s scheme.
  3. £100 for its record keeping failures with regards to the communal cleaning at the resident’s scheme.
  4. It is the Ombudsman’s position that compensation awarded by us should be treated separately from any existing financial arrangements between the landlord and resident and should not be offset against arrears.
3. Review its handling of the repairs to the resident’s bathroom. This review is to include, why it took so long for it to complete the repairs, why it took no action at all between February 2023 and June 2023 and its monitoring of missed appointments.
4. Provide the resident with copies of its most recent estate inspection reports where the communal cleaning, and communal gardens and bin areas, were inspected. If it has not carried out such inspections in the last month, it is to do so and provide a copy of its report(s) to the resident.
5. Review its record keeping in relation to the communal cleaning, and communal gardens and bin areas at the resident’s scheme. The landlord is to consider what actions it needs to take to ensure that, going forward, it maintains clear and comprehensive records and that these are readily available to the Ombudsman if requested.
6. Confirm compliance with the above orders within the timescales set out above.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the landlord pays the resident the £50 offered in its final response if it has not done so already. The finding of reasonable redress being based on the landlord doing so.