Poplar Housing And Regeneration Community Association Limited (202537310)

Decision
Case ID	202537310
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Poplar Housing And Regeneration Community Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	23 April 2026

Background

1. The resident, who is disabled, complained that the landlord failed to follow up on an occupational therapist report’s recommendations to support her in the property. She said it also then failed to follow up on an inspection that also determined a number of repairs were needed at the property.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Request for adaptations and repairs.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of requests for adaptations and repairs.
   2. No maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Adaptations and repairs

4. The landlord failed to take timely and appropriate action to assess the resident’s needs set out in the OT report and to complete repairs. Its poor record-keeping and failure to act on inspection findings meant that opportunities to resolve matters were missed, leading to prolonged delay and avoidable detriment for the resident.

The complaint

5. The landlord responded to the complaint within its timeframes and in line with its policy.

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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £800, made up as follows: £150 as previously offered at stage 2 £650 to acknowledge the inconvenience and frustration on the resident because of the failures identified in this report The landlord must provide evidence it has paid the resident directly by the due date. It may deduct payments already made.	No later than 20 May 2026
2	Inspection order If the landlord has not already done so, it must contact the resident to arrange a further inspection of all the issues set out in its October 2024, May and October 2025 reports. In the spirit of resolution, the inspection must also address the resident’s other outstanding concerns. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.   What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: inspects the all the repair issues the resident raised and that were noted in its October 2024 inspections and in its May and October 2025 inspections. It must produce a written report with photographs for both the resident and for the Ombudsman it must also assess the property for damp and mould, setting out its action plan to complete the repair work to the brickwork under the work order raised in May 2025. It must consider if other works are necessary and include these in its action plan The survey report must set out: whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards the most likely cause of the any damp and mould a full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) the likely timescales to commence and complete the work	No later than 03 June 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
21 April 2025	The resident complained that the landlord had failed make reasonable adjustments to support her or complete recommendations made in a 2021 OT’s report to adapt the property to meet her needs. She also said the landlord had completed property inspections in 2024 and in 2025 but had not updated her on any repairs. These repairs included safety hazards in the bathroom, balcony and on the stairs.
30 April 2025	The landlord “partially upheld” the resident’s complaint. It said it had failed to complete a planned property inspection in 2024 but it had completed repairs at the property. It added that it would visit on 8 May 2025 when it would review the situation and provide her with written confirmation of any works needed.
13 October 2025	The resident escalated her complaint. She said that, despite her chasing a response in July 2025, the landlord had failed to follow up its inspection on 8 May 2025 with written confirmation of the agreed works. She said she had suffered a fall because of the hazard in the bathroom.
4 November 2025	The landlord discussed the complaint with the resident at a panel meeting.
12 November 2025	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It expressed sympathy for the resident’s fall in the bathroom and said: there was no evidence it failed to follow OT recommendations it had assigned an officer to oversee the resident’s contact about any verbally agreed works it had not provided a written follow up after its 8 May 2025 visit and offered £150 compensation for this it had followed up by completing repairs
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said the landlord had completed some repairs poorly (such as in the bathroom) but had not completed other repairs. She wanted all works to be completed and better communication.

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	Adaptations and repairs
Finding	Maladministration

What we have not investigated

6. Our scheme rules state we may not investigate complaints which were not referred to the landlord as a complaint within a reasonable time, which is normally 12 months. The resident has said the landlord failed to follow an OT’s recommendations in 2021. However, there is no evidence she raised a complaint promptly and in any event within 12 months of when she became aware of the issue. We have not seen evidence she was prevented from raising a complaint sooner. For that reason, we will not investigate the complaint about the failure to complete any OT recommendations made in 2021.
7. The resident told us that because the landlord failed to address a hazard in the bathroom, she fell and was injured. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. Nonetheless, we can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

What we have investigated

8. The landlord inspected the property in October 2024 and identified several issues, including defects to a radiator, the toilet, the kitchen and the bathroom. The report recorded that because of her disability, the resident could not access lower kitchen cupboards and water overflowed from the bath when she used a shower bench. It also noted a wall had been damaged due to condensation and that there was water penetration in the bedroom ceiling.
9. The landlord did not carry out repairs or contact the resident after this inspection. In April 2025, she complained, making a formal request for reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010.  She complained about the kitchen and bathroom issues, hazards to the communal and internal stairs, penetrating damp issues and a slippery balcony. She requested adaptations in line with a 2021 OT report, as well as a toilet repair identified but not progressed.
10. The landlord told us the October 2024 inspection report was not uploaded to its systems. As a result, neither the repairs team nor complaints handlers were aware of its findings when it responded to the complaint. The April 2025 stage 1 investigation therefore relied on historic records from 2019 and 2023 and concluded the landlord acted appropriately.
11. At stage 1 the landlord committed to reviewing matters during a visit on 8 May 2025, providing a written report and reviewing OT recommendations. However, there is no evidence that it reviewed the 2021 OT report until approximately 6 months later, shortly before issuing its stage 2 response in November 2025 and it failed to provide the promised report of the 8 May visit.
12. In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered £150 for failing to provide the report as it had previously said it would. However, the evidence shows that was not its only shortcoming. By that point, the resident had been waiting for over a year for clarity on what works would be carried out. Her July 2025 request for the landlord to do carry out its promised actions did not result in action until October 2025 when it inspected again. After this inspection, it, again provided no written report.
13. By the time of its stage 2 response, the landlord had completed 3 recent inspections (October 2024, May 2025, and a further one in October 2025). All of these identified damp and mould issues, problems with the kitchen, bathroom and other areas and recorded the impact these caused because of the resident’s disability. It raised some jobs to jet wash the resident’s balcony and to inspect the radiators at the property. But there is no evidence it completed any works or responded in any proactive way to the central issues identified in its inspections.
14. Despite this, the stage 2 response said that repairs had either been completed or remained within target timescales. The records do not support this claim. For example, works to provide non‑slip flooring to the balcony were raised on 12 May 2025 but remained outstanding at the October 2025 inspection.
15. The landlord has now acknowledged to us that it lacks evidence to show it has installed non‑slip tiles, and kitchen adaptations, assessed wet room feasibility or provided an updated OT assessment. It did not use the complaints process to acknowledge or explain these failures and delays.
16. The resident told us some repairs were completed in December 2025 but said that, apart from some decoration works in the living room, these were not the works she had requested. The landlord has since said it arranged a further inspection for February 2026 and intends to arrange a new OT assessment and consider a Disabled Facilities Grant.
17. Overall, the landlord delayed unreasonably from October 2024 onwards. Although poor record‑keeping explains its failure to act after the October 2024 inspection, the landlord has not explained why it failed to act on its own findings from May 2025 onwards. This resulted in prolonged delay, uncertainty, and avoidable inconvenience and frustration for the resident.
18. The landlord’s poor handling of the repairs was exacerbated by the fact that all of the inspections had also identified damp and mould issues. It says it completed some works in January 2026 but there’s no evidence, for instance that it addressed repointing work that it noted was the source of damp and mould in the lounge in May 2025.
19. We have ordered the landlord to complete an inspection to arrange dealing with outstanding works. We have made a compensation order, based on our own compensation guidance for a complaint and failings of the scale and nature identified here.

Complaint	The complaint
Finding	No maladministration

20. The landlord’s definition of a complaint and response timescales were in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
21. Its policy aims to acknowledge both stages within 5 working days. It says the resident should then receive a formal response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the complaint acknowledgement.
22. The landlord acknowledged and responded to both stages within its policy timeframes.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. The landlord says it has now introduced and trained staff to use a new system for recording inspections. It might also find the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management a helpful aid to improve accurate record keeping.

Communication

24. As identified, the landlord failed to communicate regularly or sometimes at all about its planned actions. This was particularly concerning for this resident, who was vulnerable and repeatedly asked for clear communication. It should consider the Attitudes, Respect and Rights spotlight report for more effective service delivery for vulnerable tenants.