Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (202431813)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202431813

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited

29 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 repairs to the garden and external doors.

Background

  1. The resident occupies a property under an assured tenancy agreement with the landlord. The landlord has recorded vulnerabilities for the resident.
  2. The resident moved into the property on 16 June 2023. On 28 September 2023, she contacted the landlord regarding the sinking ground and broken flagstones in her garden. The landlord responded by saying it was only responsible for the first row of flagstones surrounding the house and the path leading to the garden gate, the rest of the garden was the resident’s responsibility. It also confirmed that there were defects from the DIY work the previous resident may have completed, however this was not something it would repair.
  3. In addition to the issues with the garden, the resident reported that there was water coming through her external doors on 19 November 2023. The landlord responded by instructing joiners, who adjusted the doors, fitted new treads, and resealed both doors from 15 December 2023. The resident then reported to the landlord that both doors still had stains, were chipped, and did not close properly. This caused issues with water and draughts. On 25 December 2023, the landlord arranged for the removal and repair of the flagstones it said it was responsible for in the resident’s garden. By April 2024, the resident was still reporting the issues with the ground in her garden to the landlord and the issues with her doors.
  4. Further works to the garden and the external doors began in mid-July 2024. The garden was levelled and rolled, and the grass was cut to make sure the landlord was able to identify and fill in uneven areas. The landlord was also satisfied that the 4 external doors were in a repairable state, so they were overhauled and repaired. Soon after the completion of the works, the resident reported to the landlord that the repairs were not in line with what it had verbally agreed with her. She also said the landlord left the garden unsafe, as the ground was still sinking being waterlogged when it rained.
  5. On 25 July 2025, the resident made her stage 1 complaint to the landlord about the repair work to her garden and external doors. She said that she was disappointed and distressed with the repair work carried out and wanted the garden put back to its original state. She did not expect the flagstones that were in a good condition to be removed. She also explained that she was unhappy with the repairs to her external doors, as they still let water in. The resident was also concerned with not being able to use her garden due to her wheelchair, as it sank into the ground. She described her garden as a “health hazard” and “tripping zone” due to her mobility issues. She said that she had reported the garden and door repairs for “a long time” and not being able to use her garden and get fresh air affected her mental health. The landlord responded and advised her that all works that had previously been discussed had been carried out, and that following the works the garden had been inspected and was satisfactory.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 19 August 2024 and advised that it was happy that the condition of the garden was satisfactory and met its safety standards. Therefore, the landlord did not intend to carry out any further works at that time. With regard to the external doors, the landlord said that they were in a repairable condition and it was satisfied with the work that had been completed. The surrounding brickwork and insulation inside the walls were all inspected and were dry with no signs of water leaks.
  7. The resident was still unhappy so she escalated her complaint to stage 2. We received a copy of the escalation from the landlord, however it was undated. The landlord responded to the stage 2 complaint on 19 September 2024. In its response, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint about the standard of the work completed to the garden and doors. It explained that the external doors were overhauled and treated with weather seal.
    1. It also confirmed that the garden works completed were:
      1. Removal of flagstones in the rear garden.
      2. Ground levelling works were carried out and the area had been rolled.
      3. Ground was then topsoiled and seeded with grass seed.
      4. Tree works had been undertaken.
      5. Replacement fencing had been erected.
    2. The landlord upheld its stage 1 response again at stage 2 and advised that the garden had had extensive works carried out. It believed the garden to be in a safe condition for use and advised the resident to report any more flooding issues to it. It also confirmed that. as the doors were overhauled, no further works will be carried out. The landlord did not provide any documentation to evidence it assessed the health and safety concerns raised by the resident.
  8. On 20 September 2024, the resident contacted the Service as she was unhappy with the repairs that the landlord caried out. She complained that the external doors still let water in when it rained and her garden was made redundant as she was unable to use it due to her disabilities.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has explained that her garden was unsafe causing her to be injured. We cannot look at any personal injury claims as part of this investigation because we do not have the authority or expertise to determine liability for or award damages in the way a court or insurer might.

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the garden and external doors.

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement makes the landlord responsible for maintaining and repairing her property’s structure and exterior, including doors, steps, and other means of access. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that all its properties should provide a safe and healthy environment and that routine repairs, including routine joinery, will be completed in 20 working days. Any planned/programmed repairs will be arranged by a mutually agreed appointment. If there are any special circumstances (disability or any other identified need) the policy states that the resident should make the landlord aware at the point of reporting so it can take appropriate decisions when prioritising repairs. It is the landlord’s policy to make sure discretion is used in cases of identified vulnerabilities.
  2. The resident initially reported her concerns about the condition of her garden and doors on 28 September and 19 November 2023, respectively. While the landlord was proactive in arranging repairs to the doors, it took several attempts before reports from the resident were attended to following the landlord’s original attendance on 15 December 2023. The resident raised several concerns about the sinking ground in her garden but action was only taken from 25 December 2023 after she raised this several times with the landlord. This was not in line with its responsive repairs policy, as it only began works to the garden after 62 working days. However, the landlord did begin works to the doors after 19 working days, in line with the policy.
  3. The landlord said that it was only responsible for the flagstones surrounding the property and the path leading to the garden gate, and not for alterations carried out by the previous resident, which it described the other flagstones in the garden as being. However, given the resident is identified as disabled by the landlord, it had an obligation under its responsive repairs policy to make sure that it used discretion in prioritising repairs for her to provide a safe and healthy environment. This was alongside its obligation under her tenancy agreement to maintain and repair her property’s exterior, including steps, and other means of access. Therefore, it should have made sure all of the property’s external areas were reasonably safe and accessible for the resident, but there is no evidence it assessed this despite her reports about it from 28 September 2023 onwards. Its failure to assess and address the risks posed by the uneven or unstable ground represents a service failure.
  4. Following the completion of the garden works on 19 July 2024, which was 205 working days after she first reported her concerns about the garden, the resident made a complaint stating that she was unhappy with the quality and outcome of the repairs. She also expressed her unhappiness that the landlord removed the flagstones in her garden. The resident explained that the flagstones allowed her to use her wheelchair and walking aids to access the garden, but that the works meant her wheelchair sank into the waterlogged turf that was unsafe for her to walk on with her aids, affecting her health.
  5. The landlord explained that the flagstones were removed as part of works to return the garden to its standard specification. While landlords are entitled to standardise outdoor areas in line with their maintenance responsibilities, in this case, the resident is disabled and had specific accessibility needs. The landlord did not appear to fully consider the effect that the removal of the flagstones would have on the resident’s ability to safely navigate the space. This is because there is no evidence that it completed a health and safety assessment after she told it her concerns about this and it told us it only reviewed the completed work. This represents a failure to take her individual circumstances into account when making decisions about the property, contrary to its responsive repairs policy’s above obligations.
  6. The external doors were also renewed during the repairs on 19 July 2024, which was 168 working days after the resident first reported her concerns about the doors. However, while the works may have met repair obligations, it appears that it did not sufficiently take into account the resident’s specific needs, which limited the effectiveness of the outcome of the renewed doors. She reported that the doors continued to let in rain and draughts that affected her medical conditions. It appears from the repair records that the landlord also failed to take reasonable steps to accommodate the resident’s disability when renewing the external doors. Despite being made aware of the resident’s mobility limitations, the landlord did not evidence that it explored or offered alternative, lighter-weight door options that would have met her accessibility needs.
  7. As the resident remained unhappy with her garden and external doors, she continued to raise these concerns with the landlord. She said that the repairs carried out were inadequate and left the area unsafe. She stated that the ground remained uneven and posed a safety risk, particularly given her mobility needs. We have reviewed the landlords repair reports and, while we cannot comment on the technical effectiveness of the work completed, we note that the resident clearly raised concerns relating to health and safety that it did not address. This was despite it completing garden and door works that were 185 and 148 working days late, respectively.
  8. In such circumstances, the landlord had a responsibility to investigate the issues raised, assess the area for risk, and take any necessary follow up action in a timely manner. Its failure to do so represents maladministration and a missed opportunity to make sure of the resident’s health safety and provide a satisfactory resolution to her complaint. We have therefore ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident and pay her £500 compensation for the failures identified in this report for its handling of repairs to the garden and external doors. This is in line with our remedies guidance, which recommends compensation in this range to recognise failures that have adversely affected the resident. We have also ordered the landlord to arrange for a health and safety report for the resident’s garden and external doors by a suitably qualified surveyor to address her concerns about these and to produce an action plan with a timeline for any works identified by the report.
  9. The Ombudsman’s previous special investigation report recommended the landlord review its staff training, policies, practices, and records in relation to residents living with vulnerabilities and distress and the condition of their properties. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar to the cases already determined. The landlord has demonstrated compliance with our special investigation’s previous recommendations, so we have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case that would duplicate those already made to landlord. The landlord itself should consider whether there are any additional issues arising from this later case that require further action.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of repairs to the garden and external doors.

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to, within 4 weeks of the date of this determination:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £500 compensation for its handling of reports of repairs to the garden and external doors.
    3. Arrange for a health and safety report by a suitably qualified surveyor of the resident’s garden and external doors to be carried out to address her concerns about these. The landlord must provide a copy of the surveyor’s report, along with an action plan with a timeline for any works identified by the report, to both the resident and the Ombudsman.