Sanctuary Housing Association (202410154)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202410154

Sanctuary Housing Association

28 October 2024


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 and concerns reported by the resident prior to signing for the tenancy, and shortly after the tenancy began related to:
    1. External issues, such as a broken bollard, open manhole, and no access to the rear garden.
    2. Internal issues, such as:
      1. Issues with the windows due to the presence of safety locks, a missing key to a hallway cupboard, and the provision of only one front door key.
      2. Repairs to the shower room ceiling and emergency pull cord following a leak from the flat above.
      3. Repairs to the cooker and panelling under the kitchen sink.
      4. Repairs to the under floor heating.
  2. This Service has also investigated the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2 bedroom ground floor flat in a supported scheme designated for use by adults with learning disabilities. The tenancy started on 18 August 2023, although the resident has not yet moved into the property. He has been staying with his parents whilst the repairs have been undertaken. He is a vulnerable adult. He has severe learning disabilities, autism, physical disabilities and epilepsy. Once the resident moves into the property, he will receive a package of care and support, designed to meet his needs, from an external support provider.
  2. The resident has given permission for an advocate to act on his behalf. For the purposes of this report, both the resident and his advocate will be referred to as ‘the resident’.
  3. The property had been empty for approximately 12 months before the resident signed for the tenancy. During the viewing process the resident raised some issues and repairs with the landlord. The landlord agreed to look into the resident’s concerns, however, it said it was of the opinion that the property was ready to let.
  4. The resident completed the sign-up process on 18 August 2023. Following the sign-up, the resident visited the flat and raised further concerns, some of which he felt were health and safety risks that would prevent him from moving into the property. The landlord said it would work with the support provider to look at the issues raised.
  5. The resident submitted a formal complaint to the landlord on 17 October 2023 as he had been unable to move into the property due to the repairs that remained outstanding.
  6. The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response on 28 November 2023. It said it partially upheld the resident’s complaint as the time taken to rectify a leak into the bathroom had taken longer than its published timeframe for an emergency repair. It offered the resident compensation of £478 as a gesture of goodwill.
  7. Following the resident’s escalation of his complaint to stage 2 on 29 November 2023, the landlord sent a stage 2 response on 16 February 2024. It apologised and acknowledged that the resident had not been able to move into the property. It agreed to reimburse all rent and service charges from 18 August 2023 (the start of the tenancy) up until 5 March 2023. It also increased the offer of compensation to £550.
  8. The landlord contacted the resident again on 16 April 2024. It said it had reviewed the compensation awarded at stage 2 due to the further delays in resolving the issues with the underfloor heating. The new offer of compensation was £900.
  9. The resident referred his complaint to the Ombudsman on 15 June 2024 as he was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response.

Assessment and findings

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint, or part of a complaint, will not be investigated.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints that “are made prior to having exhausted a members complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale”.
  3. After carefully considering all the evidence, the external issues, such as a broken bollard, open manhole, and no access to the rear garden, sit outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction as the landlord has not investigated these matters through its complaints process.

Scope of investigation

  1. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legislative framework to protect the rights of individuals with protected characteristics from unfair treatment. Under the Act, the landlord has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments where there is a provision, criterion or practice which puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled. Although this Service cannot find that a landlord has breached the Equality Act, we can decide whether a landlord has had due regard to its duties under the Equality Act.
  2. The resident has expressed concerns regarding the impact the situation has had on his health. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impact on health and wellbeing. Claims for personal injury must be decided by a court, who can consider medical evidence and make legally binding findings. Where there has been a failing by the landlord, this Service may consider any general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

The landlord’s handling of repairs and concerns reported by the resident prior to signing for the tenancy, and shortly after the tenancy began related to internal issues

  1. It should be noted that the property had been empty for approximately 1 year before the resident signed for the tenancy. The inspection carried out by the landlord to check the state of a property before a new tenancy begins, known as a void inspection, was carried out after the previous tenancy had ended. The landlord did not carry out a further void inspection prior to the resident accepting the tenancy.

Issues with the windows due to the presence of safety locks, a missing key to a hallway cupboard, and the provision of only one front door key.

  1. The resident contacted the landlord on 20 August 2023, 2 days after he had signed the tenancy, to report concerns relating to the windows in the property. He told the landlord that none of the windows could be opened as they appeared to have safety locks attached. However, the keys to the locks had not been provided. He also told the landlord that he had only been given 1 front door key, when he needed at least 2 or 3 copies. The resident explained that he was unable to obtain copies of the keys as they could only be obtained by the landlord or support provider. The resident also told the landlord that the hall cupboard could not be safely opened or closed as it had not provided a key. The resident said all the issues raised presented a safety risk and, therefore, needed to be given an urgent priority.
  2. The support provider responded on the same day and agreed to get copies of the front door keys cut. The landlord confirmed on 23 August 2023 that it would work with the support provider to look at the issues raised by the resident. However, it asked the support provider to raise the repairs with its repairs team.
  3. The resident sent an email to the landlord and support provider on 23 August 2023. He explained that the lack of keys for the windows was a health and safety risk. He said the sash windows would be used as a potential fire exit in the event of a fire, as there were no other exits apart from the main front door. The resident said that this issue should have been attended to before the property had been offered to him. He explained that if the window keys were not dealt with urgently, it could jeopardise his move into the property.
  4. The landlord has not provided this Service with a copy of its lettable standard. However, it would be reasonable to conclude that a property would need to have opening windows and a sufficient number of door keys to be considered “ready to let”. The fact that it did not, was inappropriate in the circumstances.
  5. The resident informed the landlord on 28 August 2023 that an operative had inspected the window locks. He said all new window locks were being fitted on 31 August 2023. However, the lock to the storage cupboard had not been addressed. A further repair was raised by the landlord to fit a lock to the storage cupboard in the entry hall. The work was completed on 2 September 2023.
  6. Under the Equality Act 2010 (the Act), the landlord has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments where there is a provision, criterion or practice which puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled. As the resident is disabled due to severe learning and physical disabilities, the landlord should have recognised the need to make reasonable adjustments to its usual processes. It may be that in some cases, it is entirely appropriate for outstanding work to be completed once a resident has moved in. However, in this case, due to the resident’s specific disabilities, the landlord should have recognised the need to ensure there were no outstanding repairs or safety issues prior to the start of the tenancy. There is no evidence that, with knowledge of the resident’s protected characteristics, it considered how the issues with the window locks, front door keys and hall cupboard lock would impact the resident. Therefore, this Service finds that the landlord has not demonstrated it had due regard to its duties under the Act, and its lack of action and consideration was inappropriate in the circumstances.
  7. The resident raised a formal complaint on 17 October 2023. He raised the issue that none of the windows could be opened when the property was first let, which he considered to be a fire safety risk. He said the front door lock also had to be replaced. He explained that although the work was carried out a few weeks later, the requirement for the work to be completed before he moved in delayed his transition into the property.
  8. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s concerns in relation to the windows and front door within the stage 1 response dated 28 November 2023. The reasons for this are unclear from the information provided.
  9. The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 complaint response on 16 February 2024. The letter referred to the locked windows, hallway cupboard, and keys for the front door. The response did not separate each individual repair. However, it said, as soon as it was aware of the issues, it raised the relevant work orders, which were “mostly completed in September 2023”. It confirmed that it considered the property “ready to let” when the resident signed for the tenancy.
  10. Although the landlord recognised the issues relating to the locks, hallway cupboard, and front door keys within the stage 2 response, the landlord was somewhat dismissive overall of the resident’s concerns. The landlord stated that the property was “ready to let”, even though it accepted that there were outstanding repairs at the start of the tenancy. The landlord failed to show that it understood the significance of the outstanding repairs in relation to the resident’s vulnerabilities and disabilities. It also failed to acknowledge any of these failings on its part, or provide reasonable redress to put things right.

Repairs to the shower room ceiling and emergency pull cord following a leak from the flat above.

  1. The resident sent an email to the landlord on 20 August 2023, informing it that there appeared to be a leak from the flat above through the ceiling of the shower room. He also reported that the emergency pull cord in the shower room was broken. The landlord confirmed on 23 August 2023 that it would work with the support provider to look at the issues raised.
  2. The resident told the landlord on 23 August 2023 that the leak was a health and safety concern. He said, if it was not addressed urgently, it could jeopardise his move into the property. The support provider raised an urgent repair request with the landlord on 24 August 2023, for both the leak from above and the emergency pull cord. However, there is no evidence to suggest that either of these repairs were logged, or attended to, by the landlord.
  3. The support provider raised a further repair to fix the pull cord in the shower room on 19 September 2023. A contractor attended the resident’s property to repair the emergency pull cord on 26 September 2023. However, he was unable to complete the job as the unit had been damaged by the leak coming through the ceiling. The landlord raised a further job on 26 September 2023 in relation to the leak from the flat above.
  4. Under the Equality Act 2010 (the Act), the landlord has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments where there is a provision, criterion or practice which puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled. As the resident is disabled, due to his physical and learning disabilities, the landlord should have recognised the need to make reasonable adjustments to its processes.
  5. Although its repairs procedure allows for an enhanced and flexible service for its vulnerable resident’s, it did not utilise this to ensure that the required repairs were completed as soon as possible. It also did not demonstrate that it considered the additional detrimental effect of the repairs remaining outstanding on the resident as he was unable to move into his flat whilst they were not rectified. It would be reasonable to assume, from the evidence provided, that the landlord had adopted a “general needs” approach when letting the property. Therefore, it considered that it was acceptable to complete the repairs around the resident after he had moved in. As this property was specifically for resident’s with learning disabilities, the landlord should have considered that a higher lettings standard at the start of the tenancy may be required in these circumstances.
  6. There is also no evidence that, with knowledge of the resident’s protected characteristics, it considered a temporary solution or alternative options for the resident to be safely housed. For example, the landlord has not demonstrated it considered whether the offer of a suitable temporary alternative property was possible until the outstanding repairs were completed. It would be reasonable to assume that, as the resident was staying with his parents, the landlord did not consider this a priority, or the possibility that the resident’s specific accommodation needs were not being met. Therefore, the landlord has not demonstrated that it had due regard to its duties under the Act, and its actions were inappropriate in the circumstances.
  7. The support provider contacted the out of hours repairs service on 30 September 2023 as water was pouring through the shower room ceiling. The landlord’s contractors attended on 1 October 2023. They removed part of the ceiling and isolated the leak, which was found to be coming from the underfloor heating pipes of the above flat. The heating contractors said the ceiling needed to be completely removed so that it could fully assess the extent of the work required and provide a quote.
  8. The ceiling was removed by the landlord on 6 October 2023. The support provider chased the landlord for an update on the leak in the shower room on 10 October 2023. They asked the landlord to treat the request as urgent as the resident could not move in until the leak, and the associated repairs, had been resolved.
  9. The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 17 October 2023. He said he was unable to move into his property due to the outstanding repairs. He said he had made the landlord aware in July 2023, prior to signing the tenancy, that there was a concerning stain on the shower room ceiling. He said he informed the landlord again on 23 August 2023 that there appeared to be a leak from the flat above. In September 2023, he raised the issue again as the leak was getting considerably worse. This resulted in water pouring through the ceiling on 30 September 2023. The resident said the lack of repairs had caused considerable stress and a huge delay in his transition into the property. He also said the delays had caused financial expense as he was paying heating and hot water charges for a flat he could not move into. He also confirmed that housing benefit had been suspended from 1 October 2023, as he was not living in the property. The resident said that the flat was clearly not ready for occupation prior to him signing the tenancy on 18 August 2023.
  10. The care provider contacted the landlord on 17 October 2023. They said they had visited the property that morning and could not see any improvement. They called the landlord’s repairs team. The landlord said the contractor had attended but could not access the flat. The support provider said they had given their number and details as to how contractors could access the building to the landlord on several occasions. Yet this was still not being followed. They asked the landlord to raise the job again as an emergency with a 24 hour timeframe. The landlord confirmed the job had been raised as an emergency and the support providers contact details had been added to the notes.
  11. A heating contractor attended the flat above the resident’s property on 30 October 2023 to carry out a heating survey. It confirmed that access to the resident’s flat was required to complete some additional work.
  12. The work to repair the leak was completed on 17 November 2023. This was almost 3 months from the date the resident first reported the leak. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure says it aims to complete all appointed repairs within 28 days for residents with vulnerabilities. It also says it will ensure that its repairs service is flexible towards the needs of vulnerable service users. Where additional flexibility to repair priorities and services is required, it will take into account the service users’ needs and the severity of the situation on a case by case basis.
  13. Therefore, due to the delays in carrying out the repairs, the landlord did not act in accordance with the time frames set within its processes. It also did not apply any flexibility to the repair priorities given the resident’s specific situation. This was inappropriate and unreasonable in the circumstances. This also further demonstrates that the landlord did not have due regard to its obligations under the Equality Act 2010. The resident was unable to move into his property until it was in a safe and habitable condition. This was due to his specific vulnerabilities and disabilities, which the landlord was fully aware of.
  14. The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response on 28 November 2023. It said the leak had been rectified and an appointment had been made to reinstate the ceiling on 22 December 2023. It acknowledged that the time taken to repair the leak had taken longer than its published timeframe for completion. However, it said the repairs for the ceiling had not yet exceeded its published timeframe. It apologised for the impact on the resident’s living conditions and offered the resident £150.00 for time and inconvenience of chasing repairs and any delays, £75.00 for loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home from October to December 2023, and £253.00 for loss of heating for 3 months from October to December.
  15. Although the stage 1 response apologised and acknowledged the delays in the repairs to the leak, it did not adequately acknowledge the extent of the detriment to the resident. The landlord did not seem fully aware of the resident’s circumstances. It appeared not to be aware, or acknowledge that the resident had been unable to move into his home due to the health and safety implications relating to his disabilities and vulnerabilities. It also confused the date that the leak was first reported, which was August 2023, not October 2023.
  16. The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 29 November 2023 as he was unhappy with the landlord’s response.
  17. The landlord sent the resident a text message on 22 December 2023 informing him that the repairs to the wet room ceiling would not be completed until 7 or 8 March 2024. He asked the landlord to look into the matter urgently as he was unable to move into his property until the repairs were complete. The landlord contacted the resident on 2 January 2024 and explained that its contractors were fully booked until 7 March 2024. However, as an interim measure, to allow the resident to move into his property, it could board the ceiling. The skimming and decorating would be completed in March 2024.
  18. The job to board the ceiling was completed on 5 January 2024. This was just over 4 months from the date the resident first reported the leak through the ceiling. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure says it aims to complete all appointed repairs within 28 days for residents with vulnerabilities. Therefore, due to the delays in carrying out the repairs, the landlord did not act in accordance with the time frames set within its policy. This was inappropriate and unreasonable in the circumstances. Even though the landlord’s repairs policy states that it provides an enhanced service for vulnerable residents, the resident did not receive the service he was entitled to.
  19. It is unclear from the evidence provided exactly when the emergency pull cord was repaired. However, this appears to have been completed sometime between 5 January 2024 (when the ceiling was boarded) and 16 February 2024 (the date of the stage 2 complaint response). This took between 4 and 5 months from the date the resident first reported the repair on 20 August 2023. This was again outside of the 28 day timeframe set within the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy for vulnerable residents. This was inappropriate and unreasonable in the circumstances. Particularly as this was for the repair of an emergency pull cord, which was likely to be fundamental to the provision of supported living accommodation.
  20. The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 response on 16 February 2024. It acknowledged that he had reported his concerns in relation to the leak and emergency pull cord in August 2023. It acknowledged that the leak had not been repaired until November 2023, and the ceiling had not been reinstated until 4 January 2024. It also acknowledged that the plastering and decoration remained outstanding. It confirmed that the emergency pull cord had been repaired, and it also noted that the resident had not yet moved into his home. However, it said the property was well-presented and many of the issues were “snagging” issues that should not have prevented occupation. It said it was aware that concerns were raised over a stain on a bathroom ceiling. Although, this was not deemed as an issue that would have prevented the resident from moving in, as an investigation could have been undertaken whilst the resident was living in the property. It said the property was ready to let when the resident signed for the tenancy. The leak in October was “unfortunate” but it would not have known what was to happen.
  21. The landlord said it had fully considered the resident’s individual circumstances. In recognition of the inconvenienced caused it would reimburse the rent and service charges from 18 August 2023 up until 5 March 2023, which was the provisional date for the completion of all repairs. It also offered compensation of £500 for time, trouble and inconvenience.
  22. Although the landlord acknowledged the delays in the repairs, it referred to the reported issues as “snagging”. This would suggest that they were minor imperfections, when the evidence clearly supports from the resident’s needs and perspective that they were not. The stage 2 response suggested that the issues raised should not have stopped the resident from moving in as the work could have been undertaken around him. This was an unreasonable and unfair suggestion and demonstrates the landlord’s lack of understanding of the resident’s specific needs in relation to the safety of his home. It also demonstrates the landlord’s lack of understanding as to how the work being undertaken around the resident would likely have affected him.
  23. The landlord also offered to reimburse the resident for the rent and service charges from the start of the tenancy up until the anticipated date of completion of the outstanding repairs. This was reasonable in the circumstances. However, the landlord did not offer to reimburse the resident for the “ineligible” service charges relating to his monthly payments for heating and hot water.

Repairs to the cooker and panelling under the kitchen sink

  1. The resident raised concerns about the kitchen on 20 August 2023. He said the oven had an essential control button missing and the panelling under the sink was rotten due to previous water damage. The resident said, in his opinion, the outstanding issues presented a safety risk and would need to be addressed as a priority.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord again on 23 August 2023. He said if the issues were not addressed urgently, it could stop him from moving into the property. The support provider raised the outstanding repairs to the kitchen with the landlord on 24 August 2023.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord again on 29 August 2023, to report that there was significant staining in the cupboard under the sink. He asked the landlord to address his concerns urgently, as they should have been dealt with prior to him signing the tenancy agreement. The repair to the oven was raised on 30 August 2023. The evidence provided by the landlord confirms that a new oven was purchased and delivered to the resident’s address at some point in September 2023. However, the exact date is unclear.
  4. The support provider raised the damage cupboard under the sink again with the landlord on 10 October 2023, as the repair remained outstanding.
  5. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure says it will complete appointed repairs within 28 days for resident’s with vulnerabilities. It also says that it takes a flexible approach to meet the needs of its vulnerable service users by taking into account the specific needs of the service user and the severity of the situation. However, the damaged cupboard had been outstanding for 7 weeks at this point with no expected completion date provided. Therefore, the landlord did not act in accordance with its repairs and maintenance procedure. This was inappropriate and unfair to the resident.
  6. The resident did not raise the concerns relating to the outstanding repairs to the kitchen in his stage 1 complaint. However, they were considered in the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response dated 16 February 2024. The landlord said that, on receipt of the resident’s concerns, work orders were raised to resolve the issues. The majority of which were completed in September 2023, apart from the damaged kitchen base cupboard, which had been arranged for 19 February 2023. The landlord apologised that the resident had been unable to move into his home, although it referred to the property as “ready to let” from the date the tenancy was signed. The landlord did not offer any specific redress for the kitchen repairs, however, it offered £500 for time, trouble and inconvenience based on all the delayed/outstanding repairs.
  7. Within the stage 2 response the landlord acknowledged the delays in the repairs and confirmed the date for the kitchen cupboard repair. It also apologised for the delays. However, it did not recognise the importance of such repairs being addressed prior to the start of the tenancy due to the resident’s specific vulnerabilities and disabilities. It also did not acknowledge the likely impact of the delays on the resident and his family.

Repairs to the under floor heating

  1. The landlord raised a repair on 18 October 2023 in relation to the resident’s underfloor heating. The report said that only the bedrooms were warming up despite increasing the temperature settings.
  2. The landlord’s records show that on 13 December 2023, there was hot water in the resident’s bathroom, but no heating. The records also show that a repair was raised on 16 January 2024 for the underfloor heating. It says that the job was missed previously, but it would be sent to the planning team to book as an urgent repair due to the resident being vulnerable.
  3. The landlord chased the repair with its heating contractor on 19 January 2024. However, there appeared to be confusion between the completed repairs to the leak from the upstairs flats underfloor heating pipes, and the resident’s underfloor heating not working. The landlord asked its heating contractor to raise a new job and to treat it as urgent. The heating contractor said it was “out of their hands” and booked the job in for 6 February 2024 due to there being no availability any sooner. The landlord contacted its heating contractor again on 30 January 2024. They confirmed that there was still no availability, however, they would contact the resident if an earlier date became available.
  4. The heating contractor contacted the resident on 6 February 2024. They noted that the resident was unavailable to attend the appointment. After discussing the issue, the heating contractor rebooked the appointment with another engineer for 9 February 2024.
  5. The heating contractor visited the resident’s property on 9 February 2024. He found that some of the actuators were not opening which meant the temperature could not go above 58 degrees. He bypassed the actuators and all rooms reached 62 degrees. He confirmed that the underfloor heating was working.
  6. The resident contacted the landlord again on 12 February 2024 as the heating was too hot. The heating contractor returned on 14 February 2024. He found that some of the actuator heads were loose. He also found an intermittent fault on the controller. He recommended that the actuators were all replaced. The landlord raised a job on 15 February 2024 for the works to be carried out on an urgent basis as the resident was sensitive to temperature due to his epilepsy.
  7. Although the resident did not raise the heating issues within his initial complaint, the landlord considered the outstanding repair within its stage 2 response dated 16 February 2024. It said it had received a report on 19 January 2024 that the underfloor heating was still not working. Although works were undertaken on 6 February 2024, the replacement of the temperature control panels remained outstanding and it was aware that this was delaying the resident from moving in. It said it had reviewed the timescales for the outstanding works to the heating to be completed, and it expected the property would be ready to move into by 5 March 2023. Although, this was a provisional date at the time of the response.
  8. Although the landlord recognised that the heating works were still outstanding, it did not correctly state the date of the first report, which was 18 October 2023, not 19 January 2024. Due to this error, it did not recognise that the repair had been missed when it was first reported. It also did not recognise the resulting unreasonable delay in completing the repairs. Although the landlord offered the resident £500 for overall time, trouble and inconvenience, this did not specifically relate to the underfloor heating repair delays.
  9. The repairs to the resident’s underfloor heating were completed on 28 March 2024, and the landlord considered the property to be habitable from the 29 March 2024. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure says it will complete appointed repairs within 28 days for resident’s with vulnerabilities. It also says that it will take a flexible approach to meet the needs of its vulnerable service users by taking into account their specific needs and the severity of the situation. However, it took the landlord 5 months the complete the necessary repairs. Therefore, the landlord did not act in accordance with its repairs and maintenance procedure. This was inappropriate and unfair to the resident and ultimately delayed him moving into his property.
  10. The landlord contacted the resident again on 16 April 2024 as it had reviewed the amount of compensation awarded. It said it was willing to increase the amount to £800 to cover the further delays in resolving the repairs to the underfloor heating. Although the landlord increased the compensation based on the underfloor heating element of the resident’s complaint, it did not show any learning, in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Disute Resolution Principles, or understanding of the overall detriment caused to the resident and his family by the multiple service failures.

Summary

  1. In summary, the landlord did agree to waive the rent charges and eligible services charges from the start of the tenancy until March 2024, and it offered some compensation for time, trouble, and inconvenience. However, it did not reimburse the resident for the ineligible service charges relating to heating and hot water, leaving the resident in financial detriment. It failed to have due regard to its obligations under the Equality Act 2010. It did not act in accordance with its repairs and maintenance procedure as it delayed unreasonably in completing the outstanding repairs required to allow the resident to move into his property. It also did not show that it had applied any flexibility to its repairs process. It failed to show that it understood the significance of the outstanding repairs needing to be completed before the resident could move into his property, and how this was related to the resident’s vulnerabilities and disabilities. It also did not show that it understood the overall impact the situation had on the resident and his family and it did not show any significant learning within its complaint responses, in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
  2. As a result of these failings, the significant level of detriment caused to the resident and his family as he was unable to move into his property and access the support he required in relation to his learning and physical difficulties for approximately 8 months, and the landlord’s failure to provide reasonable redress, the Ombudsman finds that there was severe maladministration by the landlord in this case. An order for compensation based on this finding has been made below.
  3. The landlord did not consider refunding the “ineligible service charge” of approximately £205 per month that the resident has paid for heating and hot water charges whilst being unable to live in his property. Therefore, this Service will offer compensation based on the ineligible service charge of £205 per month from 18 August 2023 until 29 March 2024. This equates to 32 weeks at £47.30 per week = £1513.60.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its policy says it will respond to stage 1 complaints in 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
  2. The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 17 October 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on the same day and told the resident that it would respond within 10 working days.
  3. The landlord contacted the resident on 26 October 2023. It said it required more time to carry out the investigation and it aimed to provide a response before 9 November 2023.
  4. The landlord contacted the resident again on 9 November 2023 by telephone. It left a voicemail message stating that it was waiting for repairs to be in place for the ceiling before it could send a response. The resident responded to the landlord on 10 November 2023. He asked the landlord to clarify that it had extended the response time for a further 10 days. He also asked the landlord to confirm this in writing and explain the reasons for the delay. The landlord called the resident again on 16 November 2023 and explained that it was waiting for the leak to be addressed and the works to the ceiling to be raised.
  5. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) (April 2022) says that landlords must respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of the complaint being escalated. Exceptionally, landlords may provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the reasons for the extensions were exceptional in the circumstances. The Code also states that a complaint response must be sent to the resident when the answer to the complaint is known, not when the outstanding actions required to address the issue are completed.
  6. The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response on 28 November 2023. This was 30 working days from the date the resident first raised the complaint and outside of the timeframe set within the landlord’s complaints policy and the Code. The landlord did not acknowledge the delay in its response.
  7. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on 29 November 2023. The landlord acknowledged the escalation to stage 2 on 5 December 2023 and told the resident that it aimed to complete its investigations within 20 working days and send its response no later than 29 December 2023.
  8. The landlord contacted the resident on 22 December 2023. It said it was experiencing an unusually high workload within its department together with staff absences and this had delayed its response. It said it aimed to provide a response no later than 15 January 2024.
  9. The resident chased the landlord for a response on 16 January 2024. The landlord responded and said it was not in a position to respond at the relevant present time. It said it aimed to contact the resident by 29 January 2024. The resident chased the landlord again on 12 February 2024. The landlord responded on the same day and apologised for the delay. It said it aimed to contact the resident by 26 February 2024.
  10. The Code says that landlords must respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated. Exceptionally, landlords may provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the reasons for the extensions were exceptional in the circumstances.
  11. The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 response on 16 February 2024. This was almost 3 months from the date of escalation to stage 2 and significantly outside of the timeframe set within the landlord’s complaints policy. The landlord did recognise the delays in the stage 1 response and it offered £50 compensation. It did not, however, recognised the delays in the stage 2 response.
  12. Given the significant delays at both stage 1 and stage 2 of the complaints process, the landlord did not act in accordance with its complaints policy, or the Code, when responding to the resident’s complaint. This was inappropriate in the circumstances. This not only delayed a resolution to the resident’s complaint, it also delayed the resident’s escalation to this Service.
  13. The landlord contacted the resident again on 16 April 2024 as it had reviewed the compensation awarded. It said it was willing to increase the amount to £100 to cover the delays in the stage 2 complaint response.
  14. In summary, the landlord failed to comply with the timeframes set within its complaints policy for both its stage 1 and stage 2 responses, and it failed to act in accordance with the Code. Although it recognised the delays in its complaint responses, it did not fully acknowledge its failings or offer reasonable redress. As a result of these failings and the level of detriment caused to the resident by the delays, the Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration by the landlord in this case.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the resident’s complaints concerning the landlord’s handling of repairs and concerns reported by the resident prior to signing for the tenancy, and shortly after the tenancy began related to external issues, such as a broken bollard, open manhole, and no access to the rear garden, are outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs and concerns reported by the resident prior to signing for the tenancy, and shortly after the tenancy began related to internal issues.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of the report, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report (the apology should be offered by the landlord’s Chief Executive in writing).
    2. Pay the resident total compensation of £2513.60 (the landlord can deduct from the total any amount of compensation it has already paid). This is made up of:
      1. £1513.60 for the delays in completing the repairs and the associated impact on the property and the resident’s use of it whilst being charged service charge costs for heating and hot water.
      2. £800 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and his family by the delays in completing repairs in the property, taking into account the resident’s personal circumstances, of which the landlord was aware, and the urgency of the works.
      3. £200 in recognition of the complaint handling failures and the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused to the resident.
    3. The landlord must pay the compensation directly to the resident.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord should conduct a review of the key failures highlighted in this report. Within 8 weeks, it should present this review to its senior leadership team and provide the Ombudsman a report summarising its identified improvements. The review should focus on, but is not limited to the following:
    1. What steps it will take to mitigate the risk of a long term void supported living property being in disrepair. The landlord should place emphasis on how it will ensure properties are fit to let in situations where there has been a prolonged amount of time between the void inspection date and the tenancy start date. It should consider what emergency and contingency measures it will deploy in the event of a situation where a resident signs for the tenancy of a property requiring repairs that prevent them from moving in, such as was experienced by the resident in this case.
    2. How it will ensure that repairs are logged correctly and carried out within the relevant timescales, particularly where the resident is vulnerable and requires the enhanced timescales and flexibility offered within the landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure.
    3. How it can improve the process of risk management and the passage of information between relevant departments, teams, its contractors, and other agencies where potential health, safety and wellbeing issues affecting its residents are a factor. This should include how it will ensure it meets its obligations under the Equality Act 2010.
  3. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.