We are updating our systems this weekend. You will be unable to submit an online complaint form from Friday 3 April until Monday 6 April.

Normal services will resume on Tuesday 7 April.

Thank you for your patience.

Sanctuary Housing Association (202343637)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202343637

Sanctuary Housing Association

3 April 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:
    1. Kitchen repairs following damp works.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord living in a 2-bedroom ground floor flat. The landlord is a housing association. The resident has not advised the landlord or us of any vulnerabilities.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord because repairs were not completed following its previous damp works in the kitchen of her property. Her complaint dated 16 May 2023 noted;
    1. Damage to vinyl kitchen flooring.
    2. Failure to replace a kitchen radiator.
    3. Failure to replace kitchen skirting boards.
    4. Loose wiring in the kitchen.
  3. The complaint was acknowledged on 18 May 2023. On 24 May 2023, the landlord requested evidence of the damage to the kitchen flooring to assist the complaint investigation, asking the resident to provide this within 10 working days. It stated that the resident would receive a response within 20 working days. The stage 1 response was issued on 13 June 2023. It stated that the damage to the flooring was not upheld, as the resident failed to respond to the evidence request. It acknowledged that the remaining works noted had not been completed and that an inspection would be prioritised for them. It offered the resident £150 total compensation, made up of £75 for time, trouble, and inconvenience, and £75 for the future effect and inconvenience until the works were completed.
  4. The landlord made a number of attempts to agree a suitable date for an inspection during June to August 2023, and the inspection was completed on 31 August 2023. On 14 October 2023, the resident emailed it stating that the works still were not done. The landlord recorded this as a new stage 1 complaint and it:
    1. acknowledged the complaint on 9 November 2023.
    2. apologised for the delay.
    3. and made an extension request for it to respond within another 10 to 20 working days.
  5. The new stage 1 response was issued on 10 December 2023. This response apologised for the delayed repairs and advised that the inspection report was not provided until 15 November 2023. A further £75 total compensation was offered to the resident, which was made up of: £50 for time, trouble, and inconvenience, and £25 for future effect. The resident was unhappy with this response and refused the compensation offer. On 19 December 2023, she asked for her complaint to go to stage 2. The resident’s stage 2 escalation request was acknowledged on 27 December 2023. On 23 January 2024, the landlord emailed the resident to notify her of a 20-working-day extension for its stage 2 response, and it stated it would provide her with an update by 5 February 2024.The resident emailed the landlord on 12 February 2024, as no update was received. The landlord responded and apologised for this on the same day, and it said it was aiming to contact her again by 23 February 2024. The resident did not receive further contact from it until the stage 2 response was issued on 25 March 2024.
  6. In the stage 2 response, the landlord advised that the resident’s kitchen radiator had been replaced on 20 December 2023, and that replacement flooring and skirting there had been approved on 4 March 2024 and the works would be completed together. Apologies for the delay in completing the works and its complaint handling failings were given, and failure was acknowledged by it. The landlord offered £700 total further compensation, which the resident accepted. The compensation was made up of: £150 compensation previously accepted, and a further £400 for time, trouble, and inconvenience, £100 for the future effect until the works were done, and £200 for complaint handling failures.
  7. The resident complained to the service as she was unhappy with how long the repairs were taking, and she stated her kitchen had been “freezing” over the winter with no radiator. She also later said she was unhappy with how damp at her property she reported in September 2024 was being handled. The outstanding repairs were completed on the following dates, which the landlord and the resident confirmed but she wanted investigated, as she was unhappy and wanted to know why these took so long:
    1. Skirting board and flooring – 1 July 2024.
    2. Loose wiring – 23 January 2025.
  8. The landlord also provided the service with an update to advise us of its learning following a review of the resident’s complaint, and it outlined the following changes:
    1. A personalised and consistent approach to complaints was brought in to improve accountability, with tailored responses for each resident.
    2. A new dedicated works coordination team would manage customer repairs to ensure no tasks were overlooked.
    3. An escalation process had been developed to monitor and follow up outstanding work for timely resolutions.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is noted that the resident raised new reports of damp to the landlord in September 2024. Under paragraph 42.a. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which are made prior to having exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. The resident has not, as yet, exhausted the landlord’s complaints process regarding the new reports of damp. Therefore, in line with the Scheme and to give the landlord the opportunity to try and resolve the new damp reports under its complaints procedure, this investigation will instead focus on the landlord’s handling of the previously reported kitchen repairs and associated complaint.

The landlords handling of repairs

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement obliges the landlord to:
    1. Keep in good repair the property’s structure, including internal floors and skirting boards.
    2. Keep in good repair and proper working order any installations provided by it for space heating and the supply of electricity, including central heating installations and electric wiring.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure at the time of the resident’s complaint classifies all non-emergency repairs as ‘appointed repairs’ and aims to complete them within 28 calendar days. If a pre inspection is needed, this will be arranged within 10 working days of the repair being reported. Some repairs require specialist parts to be ordered, or for specialist contractors to be called in. If these situations occur, the landlord must keep the resident informed of the progress of the repair and provide an update when the work will be completed.
  3. The landlord’s repair logs and stage 2 response confirm that the initial inspection for the resident’s kitchen repairs after she complained about these on 16 May 2023 did not take place until 31 August 2023, 107 calendar days later. While the delay was considerable, the evidence showed efforts by the landlord to progress the inspection. Up to 31 August 30, 2023, there were multiple occasions where the resident requested that appointments be later or be rescheduled. These included her declining the landlord’s offer of a 14 June 2023 appointment on 9 June 2023 and moving appointments from 25 and 27 July 2023 and 30 August 2023. Therefore, the landlord made reasonable attempts to progress the works at this time. However, it is concerning it first offered the resident an appointment 20 working days after her complaint instead of the 10 working days required by its procedure.
  4. Once the inspection was completed on 31 August 2023, a further delay of 76 calendar days occurred, as the landlord was unable to get a copy of the report from the surveyor. Internal records show repeated contact attempts were made by it for this from 1 September 2023 to 15 November 2023, when the report was finally shared with the landlord.
  5. It is acknowledged that landlords can encounter challenges relating to technical issues and/or staff conduct that could be considered unforeseen events. While the landlord tried to get the inspection report, however, it did not update the resident about the delay. According to the landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure, it should have kept the resident informed of the progress of hers repair and provided updates on when the works would be completed. The landlord did not follow its procedure to communicate with the resident and this contributed to her frustration.
  6. The landlord’s compensation guidance details the range of circumstances in which financial compensation will be offered. It states that compensation should be reasonable and proportionate. At stage 1, the landlord apologised and offered the resident £75 for her time, trouble, and inconvenience. At stage 2, the landlord offered £400 for this, which is the maximum award for service failure under its guidance. This was reasonable and proportionate to recognise the significant delay experienced by the resident to that point. This is because this offer was also within the range of compensation recommended by our remedies guidance for such failures adversely affecting the resident.
  7. In all of the complaint responses, compensation was offered for the future effect on the resident, as the repairs were still not complete. While this complies with the landlord’s compensation guidance, which refers to compensation that may be offered up until the future completion’ of agreed repairs, it can be unreasonable to try to measure future effects before the severity of these or the length of delays are known.
  8. This approach to compensation was unfair in the resident’s case. This is because the £75 offered for this at stage 1 and the £100 offered at stage 2 did not reflect the excessive delay from 16 May 2023 of over 19 months after the landlord’s 28-calendar-day repair timescale that the resident experienced until all of the works were confirmed on 23 January 2025 as fully completed. While it is recognised that the resident’s requests to reschedule a number of appointments affected the timely progression of works, these did not account for the full extent of the delay.
  9. The landlord was therefore responsible for maladministration in relation to the length of time it took to complete the resident’s kitchen repairs, its poor communication, and its lack of updates about these. It is therefore appropriate that the landlord apologise to the resident for the further failures identified by this investigation, which it has been ordered to do below, that frustrated the resolution of the matter. In addition, further compensation of £250 is appropriate to reflect the excessive delay experienced, and so it has been ordered to pay this to the resident. This is in line with the range of compensation recommended by our remedies guidance for failures by the landlord that have adversely affected the resident.

The landlord’s handling of complaints

  1. The landlord’s complaint’s policy at the time of the resident’s complaint complied with the requirements set out in the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Code (The Code) as it includes:
    1. A 2–stage complaint process.
    2. A specified acknowledgement timeframe of 3 working days
    3. Stage 1 responses within 10 working days and stage 2 responses within 20 working days.
    4. Extension requests in agreement with the resident and of no more than working 10 days unless in exceptional circumstances.
  2. Throughout the complaint handling process there were repeated delays:
    1. The 16 May 2023 stage1 complaint got a response on 13 June 2023, so this was delayed by 9 working days.
    2. The 14 October 2023 stage 1 complaint got an acknowledgement on 9 November 2023, so this was delayed by 15 working days, although the landlord acknowledged and apologised for this. The response was issued 22 working days later on 10 December 2023, 12 working days over the extension request timeframe.
    3. Following the resident’s stage 2 request on 19 December 2023, the landlord made 2 extension requests. Commitments to provide the resident with updates, by 5 February 2024 and 23 February 2024 were, however, not met. The response was not issued until 25 March 2024, an excessive delay of 46 working days over the stage 2 response timeframe. 
  3. The stage 1 acknowledgement inappropriately advised the resident of a response within 20 working days The Code states that landlords must issue a full stage 1 response within 10 working days, as does the landlord’s own complaints policy. The landlord therefore failed to follow its own procedure and the statutory requirements outlined in the Code. It was also inappropriate for the landlord to request a further extension to the stage 2 response time without providing reasons for the request.
  4. The resident was not provided with reasons for complaint handling delays in any of the complaint responses. As such, the landlord was not open and transparent and failed to take accountability for the delays, which would be expected as part of effective complaint handling. This was unacceptable. The resident was entitled to explanations for the delays, and the failure to do so caused the resident considerable frustration.
  5. The resident’s complaint email on 14 October 2023 should have been treated as an escalation request to stage 2, as it related to the issues set out in the original complaint of 16 May 2024. Instead, it was recorded and acknowledged as a new stage 1 complaint, which was inappropriate and concerning. This approach prolonged resolution by delaying the resident’s access to the extensive investigation offered under the landlord’s stage 2 process.
  6. The stage 1 response that was issued on 10 December 2023 failed to address the key issues, offered minimal compensation of £75 for ongoing delays, and did not offer an effective resolution, further increasing the resident’s frustration.
  7. However, the stage 2 response was comprehensive, acknowledging and offering a sincere apology for its delays in completing works and complaint handling, by describing:
    1. Concerns how as to how stage 1 was handled and the lack of updates.
    2. Delays in issuing the stage 2 complaint response.
    3. An award of £200 compensation for complaint handling, which the resident accepted.
  8. The landlord’s compensation guidance allows payments of up to £250 for poor complaint handling for delayed responses. It is acknowledged that, in recognition of its failings, the landlord awarded £200 for complaint handling. This was proportionate to put things right in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance’s recommended range of compensation for such failures that have adversely affected the resident. In light of the number of complaint handling failures, however, the landlord is also recommended to provide refresher training to its complaints staff to make sure their processes and actions follow its policy and the Code.
  9. The Code requires landlords to look beyond the individual circumstances of a complaint and consider whether service improvements can be made as a result of learning from the complaint. It is recognised that the landlord later provided the service with an update describing its learning following a review of this case. A number of relevant service improvements were identified and made to improve its complaint handling processes. These included personalised complaint handling, works coordination, and an escalation process to monitor and follow up works, which were proportionate to show learning from outcomes.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of kitchen repairs following damp works.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of the associated complaint satisfactorily.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to, within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
    1. Issue a written apology to the resident for the further delays, poor communication, and lack of updates identified by this investigation.
    2. Pay the resident £250 additional compensation in recognition of the failings identified in this investigation in its repairs handling.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord is recommended to provide refresher training to its complaints staff to make sure their processes and actions follow its policy and the Code.