Places for People Group Limited (202521908)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202521908 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
Places for People Group Limited |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Shared Ownership |
|
Date |
26 February 2026 |
Background
- The resident lives in a second floor flat. In 2022, she notified the landlord of issues with 2 windows in her property. The landlord inspected several times and found that both the windowsills and windows were defective. It told the resident it would replace the windows. The work remains outstanding.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective windows.
- We have also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.
Our decision (determination)
- We have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective windows.
- We have found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective windows
- The landlord has delayed significantly in resolving the issue which remains outstanding. This has led to the resident dealing with damp and cold for an unnecessarily extended period. The landlord also did not communicate appropriately with the resident, which caused her time trouble and inconvenience pursuing it for a resolution.
The landlord’s complaint handling
- There was a delay in the landlord acknowledging the resident’s first complaint and another delay in providing its third stage 1 response. It also missed an opportunity to discuss whether the resident wanted to escalate her third complaint. The resident had to pursue the landlord to pay her the compensation it had offered.
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.
|
Order |
What the landlord must do |
Due date |
|
1 |
Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:
|
No later than 26 March 2026 |
|
2 |
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £2,491.42 made up as follows:
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already made. |
No later than 26 March 2026 |
|
3 |
Inspection order We have made an inspection order because the resident continues to experience cold air and moisture entering the property due to the ill-fitting windows. What the landlord must do The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete the inspection. The landlord must decide if any temporary repairs can be carried out to prevent cold air and moisture entering the premises. The landlord must provide evidence of the inspection and what work it carried out. If no repairs were possible it must explain why.
|
No later than 26 March 2026 |
|
4 |
Completing the works The landlord must produce a detailed schedule of work that outlines the steps it is going to take to repair the windowsills and install the new windows. This must include the date it will complete the work and any milestone dates leading up to that. If the landlord intends to follow the section 20 consultation process, the steps in the process must be included in the schedule along with any corresponding dates. The landlord must provide a copy of the schedule to the resident and the Ombudsman. |
No later than 26 March 2026 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
The landlord should consider paying further compensation up until the point where it completes the repairs or issues a notice of intention under section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. If the resident is unhappy with the decision it makes, she can make a new complaint to the landlord about this. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
19 December 2022 |
The resident complained to the landlord. She advised she had raised issues with moisture in her property affecting her windowsills. She said she had called the landlord on 17 December 2022 to ask for an update, it confirmed it had not logged her previous report as a repair. She told the landlord she was feeling ignored and asked that it resolve the issue before Christmas. |
|
25 January 2023 |
The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said it had arranged a contractor to visit to investigate the damp in the property. It advised that it would monitor the issue and let the resident know the appointment date. It apologised for the delay and offered £75 compensation. |
|
28 November 2023 |
The resident escalated her complaint. She said that an inspection of the windows had taken place on 28 October 2023. The contractor told her the windows were not fitted correctly, which was causing water to come into the property. She said that water had been coming into her flat for 10 months and asked the landlord to fix the windows. She advised again that she had not received the £75 compensation she had been awarded. |
|
14 December 2023 |
The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It confirmed that the windowsills had failed and were allowing water to enter the property. It said that the warranty had expired and that it would use the service charges to fund the repair costs. It apologised for the time taken and advised it had asked its contractors to replace the windowsills. It offered £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. |
|
16 August 2024 |
The resident raised another stage 1 complaint. She said:
|
|
2 September 2024 |
The landlord provided its complaint response. It said its contractors had visited to replace the windowsills but had then found that new windows were required. It advised the contractor would be attending the following week to obtain final measurements and would install the new UPVC windowsills and windows 4 weeks after that. It upheld the resident’s complaint, apologised and offered £250 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. |
|
10 January 2025 |
The resident escalated her complaint. She confirmed someone had come to measure the windows in October 2024. She said since then she had called once per week for an update but got no information. She advised she had been emailing her previous point of contact who had stopped replying to her emails. She said she spoke to someone on 19 November 2024 who said they would respond in 5 working days but again she had no communication. She told the landlord it had not fulfilled any of the commitments it had made and that she wanted a final answer on her complaint. |
|
20 February 2025 |
The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It confirmed its contractors had provided it with a quote to replace the windows but that it did not feel that replacing the windows would stop the water entering the property. It said it had asked another contractor to visit to obtain a second opinion, which would happen within 2 weeks. It apologised for the ongoing delay and offered £300 compensation. |
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident brought her complaint to us. She said she wanted the landlord to compensate her for the ongoing delays and to complete the necessary repairs. |
|
26 August 2025 |
The resident raised a further complaint with the landlord. She said that a contractor had attended on 9 July 2025 and removed the windows, which it had to immediately reinstall because the concrete sills were unstable. She said she contacted the landlord every week and was told someone would get back to her but nobody did. She confirmed no work had taken place since 9 July 2025. |
|
29 September 2025 |
The landlord provided a third complaint response. It said it was necessary to install scaffolding to replace the windowsills. This had increased the costs and required a Section 20 consultation to take place. The resident told us she escalated her complaint but did not get a response. |
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.
|
Complaint |
The landlord’s handling of the defective windows. |
|
Finding |
Severe maladministration |
- In line with our remit, the continuing nature of the complaint and in fairness to both parties, our investigation is focused on events from December 2022 until our last record of communication between the resident and landlord on 17 November 2025.
- In the landlord’s stage 1 response on 25 January 2023, it said it had arranged a contractor to investigate the damp. The following day, the resident said she hoped someone would contact her to discuss the issue. The landlord advised someone would contact her within 5-10 working days. There is no evidence that this happened. This was likely frustrating for the resident and evidence of poor communication.
- The resident told us that an inspection took place on 23 April 2023. We have not been provided with any notes from this inspection, which is evidence of poor record keeping. Also, the inspection was over 4 months since the resident raised the issue. The landlord does not have a timescale for routine repairs linked to shared ownership properties. However, taking 4 months to conduct an inspection was unreasonable, especially given the penetrating damp highlighted by the resident.
- On 4 July 2023, the resident contacted the landlord. She said she had been calling it every week (since the April inspection) for an update. This ongoing poor communication was unfair on the resident and caused her time and trouble pursuing the landlord.
- A contractor visited on 28 October 2023. The inspection report stated that the incorrect plastic windowsills had been fitted during the build. It further stated, “the windows are not fit for purpose and are not the correct type or size so water is getting through”. The resident’s lease confirms that the landlord is responsible for the main structure of the building. This includes external parts such as walls and windows. Being aware of the defects and its responsibility, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have contacted the resident to discuss the inspection and how it planned to resolve the issue. This did not happen, which led to her escalating her complaint. Residents should not have to complain to obtain information from their landlord.
- In its stage 2 response on 14 December 2023, the landlord said it had asked the contractor to replace the windows. On 10 January 2024, it told the resident the window specialist would contact her “shortly”. On 18 April 2024, the landlord confirmed the contractor had the “go ahead” but that it was waiting on a subcontractor. However, by 16 August 2024, no work had started and nobody had contacted the resident to explain the delay or provide an update. The delays and poor communication were unreasonable and frustrating for the resident.
- The resident expended further time and trouble making another complaint on 16 August 2024. In the landlord’s complaint response on 2 September 2024, it said that its contractors would be attending the following week to obtain final measurements and would install the new UPVC windows and windowsills 4 weeks after that.
- On 31 October 2024, the resident told the landlord the contractor had not replaced the windows and asked for an update. Unreasonably the landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s email or provide an update.
- On 10 January 2025, after another 7 weeks with no update, the resident escalated her complaint. This is further evidence of her having to inappropriately use the complaints process to get a response to her reasonable requests for information.
- The landlord’s targets for responding to residents communications is 5-10 working days. The evidence shows that it continually failed to meet this timeframe.
- In its second stage 2 response on 20 February 2025, the landlord said that it did not believe that replacing the windows would resolve the issue. Inappropriately, it did not explain why it had come to this decision after such a prolonged period. There are also no records within the evidence that would provide clarification, which indicates poor record keeping. It told the resident it had requested a second opinion.
- On 22 March 2025, the resident said that someone had attended to measure the windows but that she had heard nothing since. The landlord responded after 17 working days. It said it had approved the quote and that the contractor was putting in an order for the windows to be made, which would take 7-10 days. It advised it would then be in touch to arrange installation. However, it was nearly 6 months later, on 9 July 2025, before the contractors attended to install the windows. A period of 2 years 6 months from when the resident first complained. The timescale was excessive and unreasonable.
- When the contractor removed the windows on 9 July 2025, it found that the concrete windowsills were loose. This resulted in the original windows being re installed, which caused the resident significant frustration.
- On 29 September 2025, the landlord said it needed to erect scaffolding to conduct the work, which had increased the costs. It advised the increased costs meant it may have to consider following the section 20 consultation process under the Landlord and Tenant Act. It went on to state that it would seek a second quote to see if it could avoid the process.
- On 15 October 2025, the resident told the landlord that cold air and increased dampness was entering the property due to gaps left when the old windows had been re installed. She advised this was increasing her heating costs. The landlord has not shown that it offered any assistance to the resident. On 15 November 2024, the resident told the landlord that she was running her heating 24 hours per day. Again, it offered no assistance.
- The resident told us in February 2026 that she still did not know when the landlord intended to install the windows or what process it was following.
- Throughout the timeline of the complaint the landlord offered the resident £775 compensation associated with the delays. We do not feel that this amount is sufficient to compensate the resident for her experience. We have therefore made an additional award of £300 for time and trouble.
- In the circumstances, the landlord should pay a further £1,266.42 in recognition of the impact on the resident’s enjoyment of the property. This is based on 10% of the resident’s average daily rent of £10.90 between 19 December 2022 and 23 February 2026, a period of 1,162 days. These dates reflect the period between the resident’s first complaint and the date this report was issued when the repairs remain uncompleted. The total compensation for this complaint point is therefore £2,341.42.
- In the event of additional delays after the date of our investigation report, we have made a recommendation above that the landlord considers further compensation.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. At stage 1 it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. It aims to respond within 10 working days from the acknowledgement. At stage 2, the landlord will acknowledge an escalation request within 5 working days and aims to provide its final response within 20 working days. This is in line with the requirements of our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’).
- The landlord’s acknowledgement of the resident’s stage 1 complaint was 9 days outside the target response time. However, its complaint response was issued within the correct timescales, as was the stage 2 response. All responses to the resident’s second complaint and escalation request were provided on time.
- The resident raised her third complaint on 26 August 2025. The landlord provided its response on 29 September 2025, 14 days outside the required timescale, which was a failure to comply with the Code and its own policy.
- The resident told us she escalated her complaint but that the landlord did not provide a stage 2 response. We can see that she contacted the landlord on 15 October 2025 and again on 17 November 2025. In both emails the resident expressed her dissatisfaction with the ongoing delays. While she did not directly say she wanted to escalate her complaint, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have contacted her to ask.
- Throughout the complaints process the resident has had to pursue the landlord for the compensation it offered. On 25 January 2023, she told it that she wanted to accept the £75 compensation awarded in its stage 1 response. Despite this, the landlord did not provide the payment. The resident had to ask again on 4 July 2023 and a further time on 5 January 2024. The significant delay in providing the compensation was unreasonable and would have impacted negatively on the landlord and resident relationship.
- The landlord offered £300 compensation in its second stage 2 response on 20 February 2025. On 26 February 2025, the resident’s said she wanted to accept the compensation. On 22 March 2025, she again asked the landlord to pay the compensation. On 22 May 2025, it said it was processing the payment and it would be in the resident’s bank within 15 working days. However, this did not happen and the resident had to chase the payment again on 2 June 2025. On 11 June 2025, the landlord confirmed it had processed the payment. The failure to promptly pay the compensation was inappropriate and evidence that the landlord had not learned from its earlier mistakes.
- We have made an award of £150 for the failures identified in the landlord’s complaint handling. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance for circumstances where the resident was adversely affected, but there was no permanent impact.
Learning
- On 15 October 2025, when the resident told the landlord that her property was affected by draughts and increased dampness it would have been positive to have seen what assistance it could provide. For instance, it could have attended to see if a temporary repair was possible to stop the cold air and moisture entering the property. Had it done so it would have demonstrated that it was listening to the resident, recognised the impact of the window issue and wanted to help.
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord’s record keeping was poor in this case. It was unclear why repairs did not go ahead as planned and there was a general absence of inspection records and notes from inspections. This highlights the need for improved record keeping between the landlord and its contractors.
- The resident advised that she repeatedly called the landlord over the period of the complaint. However, the landlord has not provided any call records to this investigation. It is important that landlord’s keep record’s of all communications throughout the life of a repair or complaint as this allows it to monitor progress and to evidence its actions and commitments.
Communication
- The landlord’s communication in this case was poor. It needs to ensure that it has processes and procedures in place that enable effective and regular communication with its residents. Throughout, the landlord failed to keep in regular contact with the resident, and as the evidence shows, its communication was mainly reactive. Good communication plays a key role in an effective repairs system, and the landlord should consider how it can improve its communication with residents.