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 (202429025)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202429025

Sanctuary Housing Association

29 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of a repair to a plastered wall in the property.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, who is a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom flat.
  2. The landlord changed the resident’s front door as part of planned works beginning on 19 February 2024. It advised him the work to his and another 30 properties would take 4 weeks, including work to make good the door surrounds and decoration.
  3. The resident called the landlord on 16 July 2024 and raised a formal complaint. He said the plaster around his door was damaged from the door replacement in February 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 19 July 2024.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 24 July 2024. It upheld the resident’s complaint and apologised for the delay in the remedial work. It stated it would programme the work in the next 4 weeks. It offered him £25 compensation for his time and trouble and £25 compensation for the future impact as the work was not yet complete.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 7 August 2024 as he said the compensation was insufficient as the repair was outstanding since February 2024. He said the fallen plaster had discoloured his floor covering. The landlord told him the floor covering was his responsibility however to send in a quote for it to consider.
  6. The resident sent the landlord a quote for a new floor covering for £394 on 18 September 2024. He said he wanted more compensation to reflect that every time the door opened or closed more plaster would fall out onto his floor covering. He was unhappy the plastering had taken so long to complete (29 weeks) and the landlord had not returned to paint the repaired area.
  7. The landlord wrote to the resident on 24 September and 3 October 2024 apologising for it not being able to provide a complaint response yet. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 25 October 2024. It upheld its previous decision however offered a further £25 compensation (to a total of £75) for its delayed stage 2 response.
  8. When the resident referred his complaint to us, he said he wanted the damaged floorcovering replaced and increased compensation of £200 for the repair delays.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of a repair to a plastered wall

  1. The landlord has not disputed its repair responsibilities in this case. It appropriately provided notice to the resident that work would start on 19 February 2024 to replace his and other resident’s front doors. The landlord said the work would be completed within 4 weeks and would include decoration and making good the new door and surround. The landlord’s communication was clear and provided a timeline of proposed works.
  2. We have seen an email from the resident that has not been disputed by the landlord that the plastering work was completed the week before 18 September 2024. This meant the repair took approximately 25 weeks which was 21 weeks later than promised (4 weeks) in the schedule of works letter sent to the resident. This was an unreasonable delay.
  3. Landlords have a responsibility to ensure timely and relevant communication with affected resident’s to manage expectations and minimise distress and frustration. The lack of timely resolution and its communication was not an appropriate and customer-focused response. Although the landlord states its contractor sent three letters for residents to raise any repair issues (after door fitting), we have seen no evidence of this.
  4. The landlord committed to decorate and make good the door surrounds in February and then in March 2024. The landlord failed to do so which led the resident to have to chase the repair on 18 September, 1 October 2024 and 8 November 2024. This caused the resident unnecessary distress and inconvenience.
  5. It is not disputed that the landlord took responsibility to complete the decoration as part of its planned works. It discussed the colour with the resident on 10 January 2025 which was a reasonable step to take. However, as the resident did not have any of the colour left it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have repainted it all in one colour. This would have brought the resident close to the position prior to the replastering. The landlord’s failure to do so or evidence it had considered any suitable alternatives was not a reasonable response.
  6. The landlord offered to paint the re-plastering work white on 4 June 2025, but this did not go far enough to put things right given the rest of the decoration was in a different colour. The resident refusal to accept this offer as such was not unreasonable. Regardless, this attempt to make good the decoration took 63 weeks from its planned works notification start date of 19 February 2024. Furthermore, we have not seen evidence of the decoration works being completed by the landlord and the resident reported to us that he had to complete it privately. This was inappropriate.
  7. In the resident’s complaint escalation on 7 August 2024 he complained of damage to his floor covering from the fallen plaster being trampled into it. The landlord advised him the floor covering in his property was his responsibility and that any dust from the plastering could be hoovered and wiped up. The landlord demonstrated at stage 2 that it had reviewed the photographs provided by the resident. However, it did not address the request in its previous correspondence about the flooring quote.
  8. In the resident’s emails of 18 September and 19 November 2024 the resident told the landlord that he had the quote and offered to provide it. There is no evidence of any timely response to that or further explanation which was not appropriate. While the landlord decided at stage 2 that it was not its responsibility, it would have been reasonable to have provided insurance advice for the resident to make a claim and have assisted him with this. We made an order below to reflect this.
  9. The landlord offered a total of £50 during its complaints process. This was insufficient as it had failed in its promise to have the work completed within 4 weeks. The delay of replastering was considerably outside this timeframe and the landlord failed to demonstrate that it had completed the decoration. We have seen no evidence of any learning taken by the landlord to ensure this does not happen again. Additionally, it did not provide any appropriate insurance advice. We have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident a total of £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused. This is to include the £50 already offered within its stage 2 response. The compensation offered is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where the landlord has acknowledged failings and the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.
  10. For the reasons highlighted in this report we have found there to be maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a repair to a plastered wall in the property.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days at both stages of its complaints procedure. It further states it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20 working days with a possible 10-day extension at either stage. This policy is in line with the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
  2. The resident escalated his complaint to the landlord on 7 August 2024 (acknowledged the same day) as his plaster had not been repaired. The landlord sent its stage 2 response 57 working days later on 25 October 2024. This was an unreasonable delay of 27 working days (including possible extension of 10 days) beyond what is allowed under its complaint policy and the Code. The resident had to chase a response on 18 September 2024. Although the landlord did reply (24 September and 3 October 2024) it was only to apologise it had not been able to provide a decision yet. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have followed its own complaint policy time frames and requested an extension and explained why it was having to do so.
  3. While it acknowledged the delays at stage 2, the landlord did not provide the resident with its reasons for its complaint handling delays. As such, the landlord was not open and transparent and failed to take accountability for the delays, which would be reasonable as part of effective complaint handling. The resident was entitled to explanations for the delays, and the failure to do so would have caused the resident frustration. We have made a recommendation for it to provide refresher training to its complaints staff to make sure their processes and actions follow its policy and the Code.
  4. The landlord failed to fully acknowledge the above failures within its complaint responses and was therefore unable to show learning or take steps to ensure it did not happen again. For these reasons we find there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £75 compensation which is in line with our remedies guidance where there was a minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided and it did not appropriately acknowledge these or fully put them right. This includes the £25 offered in its stage 2 response.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a repair to a plastered wall in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £225 compensation (including the £75 already offered during its complaints process if it has not paid already) comprising:
    1. £75 already offered during its internal process.
    2. Additional £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its failure in its handling of a repair to a plastered wall in the property. This includes a contribution towards decoration.
    3. Additional £50 for time and trouble caused to the resident by its complaint handling failures.
  2. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to contact the resident and provide its insurance details if he wants to pursue a claim for damage to his flooring.
  3.  Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should confirm to us compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord provide refresher training to its relevant staff to make sure their processes and actions follow its complaints policy and the Code, respond timely to repair request and monitor major repairs.