Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited (202202420)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202202420

Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited

30 September 2022


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 concerns regarding the security of her post-box in the communal area.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a flat in a building with similar properties. The post-boxes for residents of the building are situated in the communal area outside.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord on 20 October 2020, because she had caught somebody stealing post from hers and a neighbour’s post-box. The landlord carried out an inspection on 23 October 2020 which found that the post-box was in good condition, fitted with anti-theft flaps, and it was lockable.
  3. The resident made a formal complaint on 26 April 2021, as she had not received an update post-inspection, and was dissatisfied with the lack of action to secure her post-box to prevent any further theft.
  4. The landlord responded on 19 May 2021. It explained that, following its inspection, the letterbox was deemed secure and it had not received complaints from other residents regarding the same issue. However, it acknowledged that communication about its findings was delayed, following the initial inspection. As way of redress, the landlord offered £20 compensation plus an additional £30 compensation for a delay in providing its stage two complaint response.
  5. The resident brought her complaint to this Service because she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s failure to provide her with a safe and adequate post-box and its lack of action to resolve the issue. She explained that somebody had committed fraud against her in the past after stealing her post. The resident requested £5000 in compensation for the pain and suffering caused to her as a result of this.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement makes clear that the landlord is responsible for repairs and maintenance of the overall structure of the block of flats, and a range of fixtures and fittings in the resident’s home and the communal areas. The post boxes for the flats are accessed communally and externally, but there is no clear statement of responsibility for either party, either in the tenancy, or the landlord’s policies. In the circumstances of this complaint and investigation, the post boxes are considered to be part of the landlord’s responsibility to repair and maintain, mainly because it has not claimed otherwise.
  2. Any landlord is responsible for most repairs in a home. But they do not usually have to make improvements unless they are related to a health and safety risk (i.e. accident or risk of injury) or a disability.
  3. The evidence provided for this investigation shows that the resident’s letter box was not damaged, or in need of repair. There is also nothing indicating the letter box is not of a typically appropriate style and type. Accordingly, there was no obligation for the landlord to agree to the request for a new, more theft-resistant one, because that can only have been considered an ‘improvement’. Nonetheless, the landlord did consider the resident’s request, making enquiries about the cost and practicality of adapting or changing the letter boxes. It concluded that the cost and planning involved was not proportionate. In the circumstances of the landlord’s responsibilities, that conclusion was reasonable.
  4. The resident explained, in her complaints to the landlord, that she had had letters stolen several years previously, and again in the incident in October 2020. While this would clearly have been frustrating and distressing for anybody, there is no evidence presented that such illegal activity was common or widespread, of the scale where the landlord could reasonably have been expected to consider some form of action beyond its specific obligations. Nonetheless, the landlord provided advice about options the resident could consider to assist with her concerns, which was basic good customer service.
  5. The landlord’s initial response to the resident’s request and enquiry about the post box was prompt. However, post-inspection there was no further communication with the resident until she complained in May 2021. The landlord did, at this point, acknowledge its poor communication, apologised and offered £50 compensation, for both the poor communication and slight complaint delays. This was reasonably redressed by the landlord. It accepted its shortcomings and compensated in line with its compensation policy. This was also in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, for an instance of failings which had an impact on a resident, but which did not significantly affect the overall outcome.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer or reasonable redress prior to investigation, which resolves the complaint satisfactorily.