Sanctuary Housing Association (202428174)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202428174

Sanctuary Housing Association

30 September 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 landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Requests to cut back the trees overhanging the rear of the property.
    2. Associated complaints.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which started in August 2023. The property is described as a 2-bedroom bungalow.
  2. Following a damp inspection in September 2023, the landlord reported that the trees to the rear of the property and car park needed to be pruned. The landlord raised a works order on 4 October 2023 to cut back the trees. It called the resident on 19 February 2024 and advised him it had passed the works to the responsible team. The landlord noted on 18 March 2024 that it could not schedule any works, as it had not yet received permission from the landowner.
  3. The resident complained on 9 and 22 April 2024 about the landlord’s communication and the delay in carrying out the works.
  4. The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint on 4 May 2024. It apologised to the resident for the poor communication and delays. The landlord explained the cause of the delays and it assured the resident it was aiming to complete the works by 11 May 2024. It awarded £75 compensation for the time and trouble and inconvenience to the resident.
  5. The resident raised a stage 2 complaint on 12 June 2024. He said the landlord had not updated him on the works. He asked the landlord to clear gutters and prune the trees to a safe distance from the property and car park. The landlord cleared the gutters on 11 September 2024.
  6. The landlord responded to the stage 2 complaint on 20 September 2024. It apologised for its poor communication, delays and the inconvenience caused to the resident. The landlord explained it attempted the tree pruning works in August 2024 but the equipment it had at the time was not suitable. It assured the resident it was in the process of getting permission for tower equipment and would update him once confirmed.
  7. The landlord upheld the complaint and awarded £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

Post complaint events

  1. The resident advised on 29 November 2024 that the tree works were still outstanding, and the landlord had not provided any further updates.
  2. The resident chased for updates on 3 February and 18 April 2025. He said he was concerned that his roof was going to be damaged if there were high winds, as the branches from the trees were banging onto the tiles.
  3. The landlord wrote to the resident on 6 June 2025. It advised him it would carry out some minor works on 10 June 2025 to cut back the overhanging branches.
  4. The landlord and the resident confirmed that the trees were pruned on 10 June 2025. It advised us that it had arranged to complete a courtesy power wash of the affected grounds. The resident said the landlord had not yet done this yet.

Assessment and findings

The resident’s requests to cut back the trees overhanging the rear of the property

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out that:
    1. The landlord is responsible for clearing blocked gutters in the property.
    2. Residents are responsible for tidying their gardens.
    3. The landlord aims to carry out non-emergency repairs within 28 days.
    4. When a resident reports a repair, it will advise if it is responsible and, if so, arrange a convenient appointment to do the work.
  2. The landlord’s compensation guide states it would make financial awards where it has determined a failure in its services. It will make awards from £51 to £150 in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience of a service failure where there has been a high effort on the resident’s part.
  3. According to the resident’s tenancy agreement, residents are responsible for any trees within the boundary of their property. The trees in question were on a neighbouring property, so it would have been reasonable for the landlord to clarify any issues about their maintenance at an early stage. This would have helped with managing the resident’s expectations and in clarifying the timescales to complete the works in line with its repairs policy. We have not seen evidence that the landlord did this or that it explained the difficulties it was experiencing to the resident until 25 April 2024.
  4. The landlord has not evidenced that it considered the resident’s concerns about his safety due to the overgrown trees or whether there was any support it could offer him. The resident said he could not go into his garden due to falling debris as the floors became slippery and dangerous when the leaves fell. He also said he did not feel safe to remain in the property when high winds were forecast and that he stayed at his daughter’s. The landlord noted in March 2024 that the works were delayed because it had not been able to get permission from the landowner. It would have been reasonable to assess any risks to the resident, given his concerns, pending the time it could complete the works.
  5. It was appropriate the landlord acknowledged in its stage 1 response that it failed to communicate with the resident adequately, and its level of service did not meet the expected standards. The landlord explained it had been experiencing issues due to staff availability and it was aiming to complete the works by 11 May 2024. However, the resident said this conflicted its previous advice. He asked the landlord to clarify if it was still consulting with the landowner or going ahead with the works on 11 May 2024. From the evidence seen the landlord did not respond to the resident or follow-up actions agreed. After chasing for updates the resident was left no other choice than to escalate the complaint to stage 2.
  6. The landlord has not provided a reasonable explanation for the delays in clearing the gutters which the resident said were blocked by leaves and seedlings. The resident requested these works on 22 April 2024. According to the timescales published in its repairs policy, it would aim to complete such works within 28 days. The landlord did not complete the repairs until 10 September 2024 and it took repeated contact from the resident before this was done. This was not in line with its repairs policy.
  7. We have not seen evidence that the landlord provided further updates until its stage 2 response on 20 September 2024. The landlord made further apologies and explained it attended in August 2024 and tried to cut back the tree branches, but it was unsuccessful. It assured the resident it would get permission for more suitable equipment and ensure the matter was followed up to completion.
  8. Despite its assurances, the landlord did not address the matter in a proactive way. This meant the resident continued to incur time and trouble in contacting the landlord for updates. It took a further 9 months (June 2025) after the stage 2 response before the landlord returned with suitable equipment to trim back the branches.
  9. We acknowledge the landlord’s explanation regarding the difficulties it was facing in contacting the landowner about the trees and that some of these may have been outside its control due to permissions. However, it had committed to trimming back the trees and failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the extended delays. The resident expressed frustration due to the delays and the poor communication.
  10. The landlord assured the resident it would continue to liaise with the landowner to ensure they arrange further maintenance of the trees. It also said it would ensure the gutters are cleared every 6 months and carry out a courtesy power wash. We welcome the steps taken by the landlord to address the resident’s concerns. However, these were severely delayed despite the resident raising repeated concerns about his safety. This was also compounded by its poor communication throughout the case which caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
  11. Having considered all the circumstances of the case, we have found maladministration. We note the landlord has awarded £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident. This would have been an appropriate remedy, if the landlord had followed up the case and addressed the issue in a timely manner.
  12. To resolve this, we have awarded an additional £180 (£20 for each month) to cover the period from October 2024 to June 2025 where the resident experienced further inconvenience. This is in line with our remedies guidance where the landlord made some attempt to put things right, but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy has 2 stages. It will aim to:
    1. Acknowledge complaints received within 5 workings.
    2. Respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days.
    3. Respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
    4. Contact the resident to provide revised timeframes (of up 20 working days) where more time is needed to respond.
  2. According to the complaints policy the landlord has measures in place to ensure that lessons are learned from customers’ experiences.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider payments from £76 to £150 in recognition of time trouble and inconvenience due to poor handling of complaints. This includes delays in giving a response leading to increased contact from the resident.
  4. The landlord delayed logging the resident’s stage 1 complaint which he initially raised on 9 April 2024. This was not line with its complaints policy. The resident clearly expressed that he wished to escalate the matter as a complaint, but the landlord did not log or acknowledge his request. Due to this the resident submitted a complaint form on 22 April 2024. This was not appropriate.
  5. On receiving the second complaint the landlord promptly acknowledged the complaint in line with its complaints policy, and it responded on 4 May 2024 (within 6 working days). The landlord did not address all the issues the resident complained about. This caused the resident some frustration as noted in his email to the landlord on 7 May 2024. He said the landlord had not made any comments on the state of the gutters and the car park.
  6. The landlord did not commit to corrective actions agreed as part of the resolution to the complaint which led to the stage 2 complaint. Also, it did not acknowledge that it had failed to log the initial complaint in a timely manner. We have seen from the evidence that the landlord took approximately 72 working days to respond to the stage 2 complaint. The resident raised the complaint on 12 June 2024 and it responded on 20 September 2024.
  7. We acknowledge the landlord advised the resident of the expected delays and that it would take 40 working days to respond to the complaint. This was in line with its policy, but there were further unexplained delays. The landlord apologised for the delays and awarded the resident £50 for the time and trouble he had incurred.
  8. However, the landlord did not learn from its previous errors, as it did not follow-up the actions agreed in the stage 2 response. This caused the resident further distress and inconvenience in chasing up the matter.
  9. We have found maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints. Its award of £50 does not reflect the time and trouble incurred by the resident in pursuing the complaint. We have awarded an additional £100 to address this. This is in line with the landlord’s compensation guidelines.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of our Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests to cut back the trees overhanging the rear of the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of our Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must carry out these orders:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £480 (this is in additional to the £200 offered by the landlord) broken down as:
      1. £180 for the distress and inconvenience due to its handling of the trees.
      2. £100 for the time and trouble for its handling of the complaint.
    3. The landlord must share this report with the relevant staff who handle complaints, to ensure they follow its complaints policy when dealing with complaints.
  2. Within 8 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must share any learning from this case due to failures it identified in its communication. It must advise us of the measures it would implement to address this.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should follow up its goodwill gesture to complete a power wash of the affected areas if it has not yet done so.