Places for People Group Limited (202503741)

Background

1. The resident lives in a house with 3 children. He has been raising concerns about the condition of his kitchen since 2023.

What the complaint is about

2. The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of kitchen repairs.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found maladministration in the landlord’s:
   1. Handling of kitchen repairs.
   2. Complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord identified needed kitchen repairs in March 2023. Despite several appointments, the works have not been completed, and the condition of the kitchen has worsened.
6. The landlord was 4 weeks late in acknowledging the resident’s complaint at stage 1. The complaint responses did not include all of the kitchen repairs that had been identified.

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.

7. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will complete non-urgent repairs that may consist of a replacement rather than a repair of a component within 90 days.
8. The landlord inspected the property in March 2023 and again in April 2024, where it measured for parts as it identified several components in the kitchen needed replacement.
9. The evidence shows the landlord attended the property for kitchen repairs in June 2024, September 2024, January 2025, and April 2025. During the appointments, the operative who attended did not have the necessary materials. This is despite previous appointments where measurements were done and notes in the repairs record saying that parts needed to be ordered. The kitchen repairs have not been completed, and this delay is unreasonable and well outside of the landlord’s repair timeframe.
10. During the delay in repairs, the condition of the kitchen has got worse. The job in April 2025 was to replace the kitchen units and worktops, which was more extensive work than what was identified in March 2023. There was an appointment on 17 November 2025 to inspect the kitchen and arrange works as needed. The resident has confirmed the landlord attended on this date. The landlord has provided a copy to this Service of the schedule or works for the kitchen and other parts of the property. It states it intends to install a new kitchen in December 2025.
11. The resident has been waiting for kitchen repairs for over 2 years, and this has had a significant impact on him. This includes:
    1. Having limited use of the kitchen, due to its condition, which is has been challenging as a single parent to 3 children.
    2. The inconvenience of chasing the landlord and being available for several appointments where the issue was not progressed.
    3. Feeling let down after the landlord raised his expectations several times by committing that the kitchen repairs would be complete on specific dates.
12. We have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the kitchen repairs. In its stage 2 response, it said the kitchen repairs would be completed in April 2025, but the operative who showed up did not have the materials needed and the work is outstanding. We have ordered it to complete the repairs that were identified during the 17 November 2025 inspection by 16 February 2026, which allows for time to order any necessary materials.
13. The landlord has paid the resident a total of £1,200 to recognise the repair delays up to March 2025. The amount that the landlord offered at the time of its final complaint response was reasonable. However, it then failed to ensure the required work was completed in an acceptable timeframe, despite a commitment to do so in its final reply.
14. Given the work is yet to be completed, we have ordered the landlord to pay an additional £500 in compensation for the further delays since April 2025. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance and is to recognise the further distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

15. The landlord’s complaints policy says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 days, respond at stage 1 within 10 working days, and at stage 2 within 20 working days.
16. The landlord was 4 weeks late in acknowledging the resident’s complaint at stage 1. This was not reasonable and caused inconvenience as the resident had to chase and was delayed in getting a complaint response. This error was not acknowledged by the landlord in its complaint response.
17. The landlord was 3 working days late in providing its stage 2 response. This is a minimal delay.
18. In its complaint responses, the works the landlord said needed to be completed did not include everything that had been identified. This left the resident worried that the required works would not be completed at upcoming appointments. This was a shortfall by the landlord and appears to be related to poor record keeping in regard to what was needed.
19. We have found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. We have ordered £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by this issue.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping) and communication

20. The record keeping has been poor. The repair records are not specific as to what exactly needed to be fixed as the condition of the kitchen got worse. This is an area where the landlord could improve its internal processes to ensure that repair needs are correctly recorded and acted upon.
21. The communication with the resident regarding the kitchen repairs has been poor overall.