Sanctuary Housing Association (202200139)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202200139

Sanctuary Housing Association

9 January 2023


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 the resident’s request for replacement of the windows and external doors at her property.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
  2. On 4 March 2020, the resident requested for a surveyor to inspect her windows due to their poor condition, as she said they did not lock and caused a draught in the property. After several rescheduled appointments, a contractor attended on 6 January 2021. The landlord then advised it would obtain a quote for the works, and due to the cost, it would need a second opinion.
  3. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 25 January 2022, as she said the condition of the windows was poor, and she had been waiting a year for them to be replaced. She said she had chased the landlord for an update, but had not received a response. She stated the windows were old, draughty and not safe. She also raised concerns regarding the increased cost of her heating bill due to draughts from the windows and the cost of her phone bill due to calling the landlord chasing the complaint. 
  4. In the landlord’s final response to the complaint on 20 June 2022, it said that the quote had been declined to replace the windows as the windows had been included in a planned programme of works for 2022/23. It acknowledged that there had been significant delays and the resident had to chase for updates on numerous occasions. It offered £250 compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused. It advised the resident to contact the landlord if the windows required any repairs in the interim.
  5. In her complaint to this Service, the resident said she remained dissatisfied as the landlord had not replaced the windows and doors and she was concerned regarding the warmth and safety of the property. She wanted the landlord to replace the windows and doors, and she requested additional compensation for the inconvenience.

Assessment and findings

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for maintaining the window frames and outside doors and keeping them in proper working order. The landlord’s repairs policy states it aims to complete appointed repairs within 28 days. As a result, when the resident reported repair issues with the windows and doors, the landlord was obliged to investigate the issues and complete any required repairs.
  2. It is not disputed that there were failings in the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the windows. The landlord acknowledged that there had been significant delays prior to the decision to include the window replacement within the planned reinvestment programme. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman assesses whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  3. The resident initially requested a surveyor to assess her windows on 4 March 2020, due to their poor condition. The landlord acted appropriately as it scheduled an appointment for 16 March 2020, however, when the contractor arrived, the resident said she was unwell so she would rearrange the appointment. There is no evidence to suggest that the resident raised the repair again until 9 December 2020. An appointment was scheduled by the landlord for 16 December 2020, however, as the contractor was unable to gain access to the property, it was rescheduled and attended on 6 January 2021. Whilst it is understandable that residents may need to reschedule appointments for legitimate reasons, the landlord would not be accountable for the delays this caused. The landlord managed the resident’s expectations regarding the requirement for her to reschedule the appointment.
  4. Following the appointment, the landlord raised a work order on 3 March 2021, to inspect and provide a quote for the window renewal. The landlord did not receive the quote from the contractor until 6 May 2021. It was reasonable that the landlord obtained a second quote for the window replacement, given the scale of the works and the likely costs involved. It is important to note that social landlords have limited resources and are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. Therefore, landlords are expected to ensure that repairs provide good value for money, including seeking the most cost effective quote where appropriate. The exact date the landlord received the second quote is unclear, but the records suggest it was during March 2022. As a result, it took a year to obtain the required quotes for the work. This was an excessive delay which has not been adequately explained by the landlord. The  landlord should have demonstrated that it had considered additional steps to progress the works during this time.
  5. When the landlord is unable to adhere to its outlined timeframes, it is good practice for it to liaise regularly with the resident to explain any difficulties and manage their expectations. It should also take appropriate steps to resolve the repair issue as quickly as possible. However, the resident pursued an update on numerous occasions between 11 May 2021 and 17 January 2022, without receiving a meaningful update. The resident has advised that her phone bills increased due to the number of calls she had to make to the landlord chasing the repairs and her subsequent complaint. The Ombudsman has not seen details of the exact cost of the resident’s calls to the landlord, however we have considered the increased phone bills as part of our overall consideration of compensation for distress and inconvenience, as detailed further below.
  6. The landlord repeatedly advised the resident it was waiting for the quote for the repair, but failed to manage the resident’s expectations regarding an expected timeframe for this. Although the resident repeatedly chased the repairs, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord considered any interim solutions, despite the fact that she had reported security concerns and stated the windows did not effectively retain heat in the property. As a result, the landlord failed to take steps to mitigate the impact of the repair issues on the resident or fulfil its repair obligation to keep the windows in “proper working order” whilst awaiting the scheduled replacement. This resulted in a prolonged impact on the resident caused by the outstanding repairs. The resident has also raised concerns regarding her increased energy costs, which the landlord has failed to address in its complaint responses.
  7. The landlord advised the resident in its stage one complaint response on 14 March 2022, that the quote for the window replacement had been declined, as the windows would be included in a planned reinvestment programme in 2022/2023. It is reasonable for a landlord to wait for a planned works period before undertaking substantial repairs and maintenance. However, it is wholly unreasonable to ignore any urgent required repair work in the meantime and temporary repairs should be attempted whilst awaiting major works. The landlord advised the resident in its final complaint response that she could contact it if any repairs were required prior to the replacement. However, as the resident had already reported specific issues, including issues with the window locks and draughts, the landlord should have been proactively assessing whether interim repairs were required, rather than putting the onus on the resident to keep reporting these issues. It is unclear whether the resident requested any repairs following the completion of the complaints process, so the landlord should contact her and address any outstanding issues with the windows.
  8. The resident raised concerns to this Service regarding the condition of her external doors. There is no evidence that the resident raised the issue to the landlord until 14 March 2022, and the landlord confirmed the same day that the doors would be replaced as part of the reinvestment programme. The landlord therefore promptly managed the resident’s expectations, and there is no indication that it was aware of her concerns about the doors at an earlier date and was therefore unable to take action sooner. The landlord acknowledged the issue in its stage two complaint response, but did not confirm its position, which would have been appropriate, given that the resident had included the issue within her complaint escalation. Again, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord has assessed the condition of the doors to determine whether any interim repairs would be required.
  9. In its complaint responses, the landlord offered £250 compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused to the resident. This was appropriate given that the resident had to pursue an update on the repair on numerous occasions over a significant length of time, and the landlord failed to manage her expectations. However, there were additional failings by the landlord as it did not show that it had considered implementing any interim measures to reduce the impact on the resident and it did not address the resident’s concerns about her increased heating and phone costs. As the landlord failed to acknowledge these points, these elements of the complaint remain unresolved. . It is not clear how much the resident’s heating costs have been impacted by draughts from the windows but it is expected that this would have had some impact on the resident’s bills and compensation is due in view of this. Where it is not possible to establish the exact costs incurred by a resident due to errors by a landlord, the Ombudsman will take a global view on compensation and award an estimated amount, in line with our service’s remedies guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance suggests that awards of £100-£600 are appropriate in cases where the landlord has made some attempt to put things right, but the offer was not proportionate to the findings outlined in the Ombudsman’s investigation. Although the compensation offered by the landlord was deemed to be appropriate for the time and effort caused to the resident in chasing the repair, it was not proportionate to the additional failures of not considering interim solutions to the problems reported by the resident and not considering her complaint about additional phone and fuel costs. As a result, the landlord should award the resident an additional £250 compensation. Furthermore, if the windows and doors have not yet been replaced, the landlord should consider interim repairs before the scheduled replacement.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s request for replacement of the windows and external doors.

Orders

  1. In light of the additional failings identified in this report, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £250. This compensation is in addition to that offered by the landlord already, which should now also be paid, if it has not been paid already. The total amount of £500 should be paid within four weeks of the date of this report.
  2. If a date has not yet been arranged to replace the windows, the landlord should implement a meaningful interim plan to address the current problems with the windows in the short term, within six weeks of the date of this report.
  3. The landlord should provide evidence that it has complied with these orders within the timeframes listed above.