Southern Housing (202331162)

Background

1. The resident reported in January 2023 that her kitchen window was cracked. She complained to the landlord on 9 August 2023 because it had not repaired the window during that time.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Reports of a cracked kitchen window.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a cracked kitchen window.
4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

5. There were failures in the landlord’s response to the resident’s repair request which caused severe delays.
6. There was a delay by the landlord in responding to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 and it failed to escalate the resident’s complaint within its timescales.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

7. The landlord has not provided the resident’s full repair history relating to the window repair. This demonstrates poor record keeping by the landlord. Record keeping is a core function of a repairs service, not only so that a landlord can provide information to the Service when requested, but also because this assists the landlord in fulfilling its repair obligations. Accurate and complete records enable outstanding repairs to be monitored and managed, and the landlord to provide accurate information to its residents.
8. The resident reported a cracked kitchen window to the landlord on 26 January 2023. (This date is included in the stage 2 response and is confirmed in an email from the resident to the landlord on 27 December 2023.) On 9 August 2023 she complained to the landlord about a crack in the kitchen window and condensation. The landlord’s repair policy does not set a timescale for standard repairs but states that repairs will be completed “as soon as possible.” It would have been reasonable for the landlord to complete this type of repair within 30 working days. The landlord did not manage the repair appropriately.
9. On 15 August 2023 a surveyor attended and confirmed that a new window pane was required. In its stage 1 response the landlord advised that an operative would attend on 14 September 2023 to carry out the repair. The landlord’s scheduling of the repair within this timeframe was reasonable given that this was a made to measure window unit.
10. On 13 September 2023 the resident told the landlord the appointment booked for 14 September 2023 was for a kitchen cabinet repair and not the window as agreed. She asked when the window repair would be completed. The landlord did not respond which was not reasonable as it should have clarified the situation and updated the resident. This was a communication failing.
11. We have seen little evidence of communication with the resident after that point about the replacement window. We acknowledge that replacing a window can take time as it needs to measure up and then source a made-to-measure unit. In these circumstances it is important for the landlord to provide clear and effective communication to the resident giving regular updates and setting out its expectations. In this case, the landlord’s communication with the resident was not reasonable. There were few updates and she had to regularly chase for information.
12. The landlord confirmed that the reglaze was completed on 8 April 2024 after further delays caused by the glass delivery. The repair was completed over 14 months after the resident had initially reported the repair. As the landlord acknowledged, these delays were significant and had an adverse impact on the resident.
13. In its final complaint response, the landlord apologised for the delays and acknowledged they were excessive. It awarded £185 compensation for the inconvenience it had caused. This amount does not reflect the full impact on the resident who likely experienced inconvenience and frustration and had to contact the landlord several times to chase the repair. Therefore we have made a finding of maladministration. We have ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation of £205, bringing the total compensation to £390. Compensation was calculated at £30 per month of delay (allowing one month for the repair). This is in line with our remedies guidance which states such a sum is appropriate where a failure adversely affected the resident but did not have a permanent impact.

14. On 9 August 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to submit a formal complaint. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 17 August 2023 which was 7 days later. This did not meet the landlord’s policy which states it should contact residents within 5 working days.
15. On 13 September 2023 the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at stage 1. This took 18 working days which did not meet the landlord’s complaint policy of 10 working days which was inappropriate. The landlord did not inform the resident about this delay. It should have contacted her within the initial 10 working days to request an extension as its policy allows.
16. On 13 September 2023 the resident requested a stage 2 review. The landlord did not respond. The resident contacted the landlord on 4 further occasions to escalate her complaint but the landlord did not reply to her. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 request on 3 January 2024 which was 77 working days after the resident first escalated her complaint. This delay was inappropriate as it did not meet the landlord’s policy. We expect landlords to raise escalations in line with their policy and respond to residents’ queries within a reasonable time. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 31 January 2024. This met its policy of 20 working days from acknowledging the escalation.
17. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged its complaint handling failures and awarded the resident £50 compensation. The compensation offered does not reflect the impact these failures had on the resident. Therefore, we have made a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident a further £100 compensation. This is in line with our remedies guidance which says such a sum is appropriate where failures adversely affected the resident but did not have a permanent impact.

Learning

18. The landlord should review its record keeping of repairs and how it communicates with residents to prevent delays.