Southern Housing (202337233)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202337233

Southern Housing

21 August 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 complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the door entry and intercom systems at the resident’s block of flats.

Background

  1. The resident holds a secure tenancy with the landlord. The resident’s property is a ground floor flat in a block. The resident has mobility issues. The landlord has informed us that it was not aware of these issues at the time of the resident’s complaint.
  2. On 2 February 2022, another resident in the block reported to the landlord that their door fob to the communal door was not working and they were not able to buzz people through on the intercom to let them in. The landlord’s contractor’s records show that on 15 March 2022, it managed to repair the intercom to 4 out of the 6 flats in the block. The contractor said that the issue was potentially due to a problem with cables within the intercom system.
  3. The resident reported to the landlord on 11 July 2022, that the communal front door and lock had been damaged due to forced entry. On 14 July 2022, he reported to the landlord that its contractors had repaired the door, however the intercom and door fobs were no longer working.
  4. On 28 September 2022 and 25 October 2022, the resident reported to the landlord that the communal front door to the block was not secure as the lock had been removed.
  5. The resident reported to the landlord on 16 November 2022, that an engineer had attended that day to repair the doorframe, however since the repair, the door fobs were not working. He said he could get out of the building but could no longer get in. He called again the following day to chase the issue.
  6. Around 4 December 2022, the resident complained to the landlord. He said that the intercom had not been working for months. He said this had led to him missing deliveries.
  7. The landlord’s contractor told the landlord on 22 December 2022 that it needed to upgrade the intercom and door entry system.
  8. On 23 December 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said residents at the block had reported several different issues over the past few months, some of which had been caused by the misuse of the communal front door. It said its contractors had attended the block on each occasion, but the issue now needed further investigation. It said due to the festive period it would not be able to give the resident an update until 12 January 2023. It apologised that the resident had had difficulties with deliveries and suggested that he make alternative arrangements for these until the issue was resolved.
  9. Another resident in the block reported to the landlord on 28 December 2023, that due to the door entry system not working, people were being locked out for long periods of time. The landlord’s contractor disarmed the door entry system, and the resident who had reported the issue agreed to wedge the door open until the landlord could repair the door entry system.
  10. Between April 2023 and November 2023, the resident reported on 3 separate occasions that the intercom was not working and that the doorframe of the communal front door was damaged. The landlord’s records say it repaired the intercom and doorframe in April 2023 and July 2023.
  11. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 24 November 2023. He said that the intercom had not been working for over a year, which meant that he and other residents were not able to answer the door properly and had missed parcels and deliveries.
  12. On 7 December 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said its contractor had provided it with a quote on 12 January 2023, to upgrade the door entry and intercom systems, however it had not processed this quote correctly. It said it had now approved the quote, and its contractor would contact the resident to let him know when it would be repairing the system. It said the time the resident had had to wait for these repairs thus far was unacceptable and apologised for this. It acknowledged that due to being on the ground floor he had had to deal with visitors and delivery drivers knocking at his flat to gain entry to the block. It offered the resident £45 compensation broken down as £15 for its failure to follow its processes, £15 for the repeated visits from its contractors and £15 for the resident having to repeatedly chase the issue.
  13. The landlord’s contractor’s records of 12 December 2023, show that no residents in the block had key fobs to the communal door. The contractor’s records of 19 December 2023 state that it was unable to programme the fobs as the door system needed to be upgraded.
  14. On 5 March 2024, the landlord’s contractor upgraded the door and intercom systems. The contractor’s records of 20 March 2024, state that it replaced part of the door lock as this had been bent out of shape.
  15. The resident complained to the Ombudsman on 27 March 2024. He said that the landlord had not yet installed the new door entry and intercom system in all flats in the block, leading to people still propping the front entrance door open or knocking at his flat for him to let them in. He said he was not happy with the amount of compensation the landlord had offered him.
  16. The resident told us on 13 August 2025 that the communal front door was still in need of repair as someone had damaged the doorframe, which meant that the door was not fully secure.

Assessment

Policies and procedures

  1. Under the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure and exterior of the resident’s property.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy states that where it is responsible for repairs to communal areas and facilities, it will aim to complete these repairs as quickly as possible. The policy states that communal repairs include repairs to entrances. In addition, the policy states it will respond to an emergency repair within 6 hours and for a non-emergency repair it will arrange an appointment as soon as possible.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the door entry and intercom systems

  1. It is acknowledged that the cost of replacing door entry and intercom systems can be considerable and that therefore the landlord may have needed to consult with any leaseholders in the block as they would have been liable for the cost of any upgrade via their service charge. This consultation process can take time. The landlord may also have needed to seek multiple quotes to ensure good value for money. However, the door entry and intercom systems had been faulty since February 2022 and despite its contractor providing the landlord with a quote to replace these systems in January 2023, it did not do so until March 2024. This will have caused the resident considerable inconvenience as the door entry and intercom systems were not working properly for a period of over 2 years, leading him to miss deliveries, and having to let other residents and visitors into the block, due to his property being on the ground floor.
  2. The landlord has stated that it upgraded the door entry and intercom systems on 5 March 2024. However, the resident has disputed this. The resident told the Ombudsman on 27 March 2024 that the landlord had not installed the new intercom in all the flats in the block. We do not doubt the resident’s testimony, however, we have not seen evidence that he made any further reports to the landlord about problems with the intercom system, and as we are impartial, we must ensure that our investigation is evidence-based.
  3. The resident has told us that he has mobility issues. We understand this would have made it more difficult for him to answer the communal door on behalf of other residents. However, there is no evidence that the landlord was aware of the resident’s mobility issues at the time of the complaint. Therefore, it could not take this into account when prioritising repairs or offering compensation. It would be unfair for the Ombudsman to criticise the landlord for not responding to something it was not aware of. However, we recommend that, with the resident’s permission, the landlord updates its records to reflect that the resident has mobility issues so it can take this into account for its services going forward.
  4. Overall, the length of time it took the landlord to replace the door entry and intercom systems was unreasonable. The landlord has offered the resident £45 compensation for the delay. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, published on our website, sets out our approach to compensation. The remedies guidance states that where we identify maladministration which adversely affected a resident, compensation of £100-£600 should be considered. In view of the time, trouble and inconvenience the resident will likely have suffered in this case over a prolonged period of time, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident additional compensation of £205. This brings the total compensation to £250, taking into account the landlord’s earlier offer of £45.
  5. As noted above, the resident has told us that the doorframe of the communal front door is in need of repair. We recommend that the landlord inspect the doorframe and carry out any necessary repairs within industry best practice timescales for completing routine repairs of 28 days.
  6. We also recommend that the landlord consider how the other residents in the block were affected by its handling of the repairs to the door entry and intercom systems and whether it would be appropriate to award them compensation. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the affected residents may have been affected differently based on their individual circumstances and therefore they may be entitled to different amounts of compensation. The landlord should consider the individual circumstances of each household when assessing compensation.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs to the door entry and intercom systems at the resident’s property.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £205 compensation for the trouble and inconvenience caused by its errors in its handling of repairs to the door entry and intercom systems within 4 weeks of the date of this report, ensuring that it provides the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance by the same date. It should also pay the resident the £45 compensation it offered him through its complaint process, if it has not done so already.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend that the landlord:
    1. Inspects the doorframe of the communal front door and carries out repairs if necessary.
    2. Considers how the other residents in the resident’s block were affected by its handling of the repairs to the door entry system, and whether it would be appropriate to award them compensation. The landlord should consider the individual circumstances of each household when assessing compensation.
    3. Updates its records (with the resident’s consent) to reflect his mobility issues, so it can take this into account where appropriate in its services in the future.