Southern Housing Group Limited (202120117)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202120117

Southern Housing Group Limited

14 August 2023

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Request for a copy of an EWS1, External Wall System fire review certificate.
2. Request to provide evidence of fire safety.
3. Complaint.

Scope of investigation

Following the landlord having provided the resident with an EWS1 certificate, the resident has advised this Service that they would like the landlord to demonstrate that service charges for shared owners will not go above those for leaseholders. There has been no evidence to show that this has been raised directly to the landlord or that the landlord has had the opportunity to respond to this request. This report will not refer to this matter as part of this case.

Background

The resident resides in a two bedroomed flat on the fourth floor in a five-storey building, under a shared ownership scheme. The resident purchased the property on 27 April 2007. The landlord holds a head lease with a superior landlord.

Legal guidance and policies

Under the terms of the lease, the landlord is responsible for the maintenance, repair, renewal and (where, in the reasonable opinion of the landlord, such works were required) improvements to the internal common parts included in the premises demised to the landlord by the headlease.
The landlord’s complaints process at the time of this complaint had an informal stage, aimed at resolving simple issues within ten working days of a resident raising them. The landlord’s complaint policy said it would respond to formal complaints within ten working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
Under the landlord’s compensation policy, it stated that if it failed to provide excellent service it would apologise for any failures, take appropriate action to rectify the issue or failure and consider if it would be appropriate to recognise the failure by way of a goodwill gesture or a payment of compensation. For example, it states:
1. Failure to follow policy/procedure or act in a reasonable manner a goodwill payment up to £25 can be made.
2. For multiple service failures and/or the customer is requesting compensation for an unquantifiable loss such as inconvenience and distress caused by the failure(s) a payment of between £25 – £50 can be made.
3. In recognition that every case is different and to take into account the severity of the issue and any vulnerabilities of the people affected, a discretionary payment can be awarded. There is no limit in terms of the amount that can be paid, except for those set out in delegated authority limits, but the payment must be agreed by a Regional Director or equivalent role.

Fire safety

In the landlord’s Fire Safety Policy effective from 12 July 2020, it states:
1. “When fire safety works are being carried out (for example, remedial works, actions resulting from a fire risk assessment or from primary authority visits) there may be additional fire safety regulations that employees, residents, contractors and other parties may need to comply with. Southern Housing Group, as the Responsible Person under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 will:
  1. Carry out a fire risk assessment of the premises and review it regularly, in accordance with the recommendations in the fire risk assessment for each property.
  2. Tell residents and employees or their representatives about the risks identified and carry out remedial action to remove those risks so far as reasonably practicable.
  3. Put in place, and maintain, appropriate fire safety and mitigation measures.
  4. Plan for an emergency.
  5. Provide employees and residents with information and fire safety instructions, where required.
  6. Carry out more in-depth assessments of all blocks in a risk-based plan for high-risk blocks, extra care schemes, sheltered schemes, homes in multiple occupation and other buildings where a greater risk is identified.

EWS1 certificates

In December 2019, following the Grenfell fire and government advice regarding building safety, the EWS1 was introduced for buildings over 18 metres high. The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) had devised the EWS1 form for the purpose of providing confirmation to valuers and lenders that an external wall system or attachments on buildings containing flats had been assessed by a suitable expert. In January 2020, the government issued guidance that stated that “for the avoidance of doubt, building owners should follow the steps in this advice as soon as possible to ensure the safety of residents and not await further advice or information to act”. It added that “The need to assess and manage the risk of external fire spread applies to buildings of any height.” Following this advice, mortgage lenders began to require an ESW1 for buildings under 18 metres as well.
In July 2021, the government issued a statement stating that EWS1 forms were not needed for buildings below 18 metres.
There was no statutory or automatic obligation for landlords to carry out an EWS1 assessment or provide copies of EWS1 forms to leaseholders.

Summary of events

Following a fire in the building, on 7 November 2020, the residents were moved to temporary accommodation, whilst the landlord’s contractors carried out repairs and decorative works.
On 1 July 2021, the landlord carried out a type four (intrusive) assessment of the floor above the resident’s flat. It noted that in November 2020 a car fire in the basement car park led to smoke entering the upper floor communal areas, and into some of the flats via service riser shafts and the smoke ventilation shaft. The damage caused by the recent fire resulted in the entire building being evacuated and remedial works had taken place to restore the building. The landlord had planned that residents would return to their homes in early August 2021. The report following the assessment identified a number of actions that needed to be taken to improve the fire safety following the works that had been carried out.
On 12 August 2021, the landlord wrote to residents giving instructions for collecting their keys, returning to the building and for reporting any further repairs.
The resident emailed the landlord on 13 August 2021 to request a copy of the EWS1 certificate. They said that it had “promised” an EWS1 certificate to residents before their return home at the end of July 2021.
On 1 September 2021, the resident emailed the landlord to raise concerns about the integrity of the smoke shaft and shutters within the building. They reported that on 31 August 2021 the third-floor shutter to the smoke shaft was permanently open. They advised that “the shutters should only be open in case of smoke and closed again once the incident is over.” And that “when smoke shaft shutters open, the top of the ventilation shaft should also open, so the smoke escapes out of the building.” However, the resident advised “the top of the ventilation shaft appears covered.” The resident also provided photographs and asked the landlord to answer the following questions:
1. Why there was a failure with the smoke shaft?
2. Why had it been opened and remained open?
3. What would the landlord put in place to avoid this happening again?
4. Explain why the top of the shaft still appears to be blocked, putting residents, especially on the fifth floor, at risk of smoke inhalation?
On the same day, the resident also emailed the landlord advising they had still not received an EWS1 certificate and asked why their building was not included in the landlord’s current EWS1 programme, which covered buildings of three stories or more.
The landlord replied to the resident’s email in relation to their fire safety concerns on the same day. It said:
1. That it would arrange for someone to inspect and reset the smoke door.
2. There was ventilation at the top of the smoke shaft. The ventilation was not in the roof of the shaft, but in the sides at the top of the shaft. This was the reason the resident could see day light at the top of the shaft in their photo.
3. It was arranging for its Fire Risk Assessor to attend site to update the fire risk assessment, as its contractor was due to handover the communal areas.
On 2 September 2021, the landlord carried out a Fire Risk Assessment. It was noted that the assessment was carried out following re-occupation of the building. It also noted that a pre-occupation Type 4 intrusive Fire Risk Assessment had been carried out on the fifth floor only, on 1 July 2021. The assessment that was carried out included the ventilation shaft and doors.
The landlord also responded to the residents request for an EWS1 certificate that day saying that:
1. It held a head lease with the superior landlord and the superior landlord was responsible for maintaining the external fabric of the building.
2. The building managing agents indicated that an EWS1 certificate would be made available. It advised it was working with them to agree a solution.
3. As the building was below 18 metres there was no requirement for a EWS1 certificate for the building.
4. It would continue to work with the managing agent and would update residents on the outcome.
The resident again emailed the landlord on 5 September 2021, making a formal complaint about not being given an EWS1 certificate. He said that residents in the adjoining building had received certificates from the landlord, but his building had not been included in this EWS1 assessment programme.
The resident emailed the landlord on 7 September 2021, to advise that it had been eight days since their concerns around the smoke shaft having been reported and the matter had not been resolved. They also told the landlord that the contractor had completed works in the communal area the previous week and the residents still did not know if they were safe and would not know until a fire risk assessment was carried out. They asked when the assessment would be carried out and what evidence would be provided to them to give them the re-assurance of their safety. They also raised concern at “floors 0–3” had two smoke detectors near the smoke shafts and floors four and five only had one. They asked when the “missing detectors” would be installed.
The landlord responded to the resident regarding their concerns about fire safety on 16 September 2021 and said:
1. It had requested an on-site contractor to reset the system. Further repairs were needed, and it also needed to change the opener on the ventilation shaft door. It apologised that this had not been done and confirmed it would chase its contractor.
2. The smoke detectors would have been included as part of the test and inspection completed by its contractor and it was awaiting the documentation from this.
3. It had arranged for its Fire Contractor to attend site on Friday 24 September 2021, to inspect the smoke shaft and automatic opening vent in the stairwell. It had instructed the contractor to provide a report on the suitability of the system that was currently in place.
4. Its Fire Risk Assessor had carried out a Fire Risk Assessment to the building and it was being reviewed. “The smoke detectors were not raised as a deficiency as the single detectors position is not excessively distant from the smoke shaft doors,” however, the Fire Contractor would check this.
On 28 September 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage one complaint about the delays in an EWS1 certificate being provided and said that it would provide a response by 12 October 2021.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident’s complaint in relation to the EWS1 certificate on 12 October 2021, saying:
1. It was in the process of finalising phase two of its building safety programme and the buildings surveyed would receive an EWS1 form if necessary. It expected phase two to take place between October 2021 and March/April 2022. Once completed it could take up to three months for the surveys to be analysed and a certificate to be issued.
2. The resident’s building was placed on phase three of its programme which would be carried out during 2022/2023. However, due to the fire in the building in 2020, the building was of particular concern to the landlord, and it was exploring the possibility of the building being added to the phase two programme.
On 14 October 2021, the resident made a further complaint to the landlord about its response to their concerns over fire safety. Their concerns were:
1. Since the 3 September 2021, all residents had moved back into the building. It had been six weeks and they had not been provided with any evidence that the ventilation system was safe and was not faulty. The concern was that all residents, especially those on fifth floor were at risk until a Fire Risk Assessment of the ventilation system demonstrated it is 100% safe and working as expected and this was evidenced to them. The resident asked for a Fire Risk Assessment to be carried out and evidence shared with the residents that the ventilation shaft was 100% safe.
2. The smoke detectors had not been inspected since the fire. They stated that most of the smoke detectors are either unlabelled, or uninspected, or had the latest label as having been inspected on 2020/07. The resident asked for an inspection of all smoke detectors to be carried out and the landlord to demonstrate that this had been done.
3. The resident felt that there were missing smoke detectors next to the smoke shaft on floors four and five, where they only had one smoke detector. All the remaining floors below had two smoke detectors. The resident asked for smoke detectors to be installed next to the smoke shafts on floors four and five.
On 15 October 2021, the resident asked the landlord to escalate their complaint about the EWS1 certificate, to stage two of its complaints process. Their reasons for this were:
1. The landlord had assured residents twice that it would look to provide an EWS1 certificate. The first commitment was in October 2020, before the fire, and the second time before the residents returned to the building in August 2021. It had not provided the certificate as it had promised.
2. The building that had received an EWS1 certificate from the landlord was “the same building” as the one that the resident lived in, but with separate entrances. The surveyor had taken samples from the buildings, but only issued certificates for the other building. As a result, they said residents were unable to obtain a certificate, while the other residents in the adjoining building could. The resident said that they felt this was discrimination and while the residents “all pay a service charge, some get services, and some do not.”
3. The lack of an EWS1 certificate impacted on the residents lives as they felt they were “unable to sell or staircase or have to face a significant loss of value to their properties”, due to not having a certificate. The resident requested certificates be provided to residents in their building at a reasonable cost.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s second complaint at stage one of its complaints process regarding the fire safety concerns on 19 October 2021, and advised that it would provide its response within ten working days. It emailed the resident on 1 November 2021, to advise that it was still gathering information and would need to extend the response time for a further ten working days.
The landlord provided it’s stage one complaint response on 15 November 2021, regarding their fire safety complaint. In its response it said:
1. The Primary Fire Authority had inspected and passed the building as safe for residents to return to their homes.
2. It had carried out a type 4 Fire Risk Assessment to the common parts and the fifth floor in July 2021, and had carried out some improvement works as a result.
3. A specialist fire consultant inspected the buildings safety systems which “included an assessment of the automatic opening vent system at the top of the communal stairwell; the smoke shaft including its vent and the detectors in the communal area.”
4. It was reviewing the report and would inform residents of the outcome of the inspection, and any improvements or repairs that were recommended or required.
5. It had made its Estate Caretaking Team aware of the smoke shaft and fire panel issues and it would be monitoring any faults and communicating these to its Customer Safety Team, who looked after the fire service in the building.
The resident emailed the landlord on 27 November 2021 to escalate his second complaint in relation to fire safety, saying he remained dissatisfied because:
1. There was no evidence provided to confirm the ventilation system was 100% safe.
2. The smoke detectors had not been inspected since the fire and most were unlabelled or had the latest label of 2020/07.
3. There were “missing smoke detectors on floors four and five.”
On 30 November 2021, the residents councillor wrote to the Ombudsman asking for the resident’s first complaint about the ESW1 certificate to be investigated. We advised that we could not investigate this until the landlord had completed its complaint process.
The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 21 January 2022 advising that he was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to his second complaint about fire safety. This Service wrote to the landlord asking it to provide a stage two response to his complaint.
Following the residents complaint to the Ombudsman in relation to the EWS1 certificate, we wrote to the landlord on 20 April 2022, and asked for the resident to be contacted by 5 May 2022. The landlord was asked to explain what stage the complaint was at and what action the resident could take if they remained dissatisfied.
The landlord emailed the resident on 3 May 2022 and advised that further time was needed for them to respond to the complaint regarding the fire safety and that they expected to be able to provide this by 5 May 2022. The landlord advised this Service that it had been unable to provide their response on 5 May 2022 and had contacted the resident with a new date of response, the new date was not provided in their contact with this Service.
The landlord provided its stage two complaint response in relation to the resident’s complaint about fire safety on 13 May 2022. Whilst it was not included in the stage two response communication, an offer of £50 compensation to the resident in made in the email the response we sent in, to recognise the delays experienced in the complaint handling and apologised for this. In its response the landlord said:
1. It apologised for the delay in providing a response. This was due to the issues raised being more technical and complex, than it had first thought.
2. It had carried out a number of assessments in the residents building following the fire and these had been carried out by its Fire Assessor, external consultants, and the Primary Fire Authority, to ensure the building complied with fire safety legislation. As a result of the pre-occupation fire risk assessment, it had undertaken some improvements to the firestopping and compartmentation to the homes and the top floor.
3. It would continue to periodically continue with fire risk assessments to the residents building and any concerns would be passed to its Fire Safety Team for action.
4. Its consultants had carried out a survey of the smoke ventilation system in December 2021, and confirmed that it was working correctly.
5. The smoke detectors were inspected as part of the survey and routinely in fire risk assessments. The date on the labels would not necessarily be changed when they had been inspected.
6. Its Fire Safety Team had provided verbal assurance that the building had the required number of smoke detectors on all floors in the residents building. Any fire risk assessments or surveys of the smoke ventilation system would identify insufficient numbers of smoke detectors, and all of them were satisfied.
7. It believed it had properly addressed the fire safety issues in the residents building but understood the concern by the resident. Any further concerns should be addressed to its Fire Safety Team or the residents Housing Services Manager.
The resident remained dissatisfied and asked the Ombudsman to investigate on 15 May 2022.
On 27 June 2022, the landlord provided the resident with an EWS1 certificate.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the request of a copy of an EWS1 certificate

The resident asked the landlord for a copy of a EWS1 certificate in August 2021. The landlord responded within a reasonable time frame and advised that while it was not responsible for providing the certificate, it was working with the appropriate people to find a resolution. The landlord did not confirm whether the resident would or would not receive a certificate in its response. The landlord could have been clearer and confirmed its position regarding the certificate and when it would next update the resident. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to confirm its position with the resident clearly at this stage.
In its stage one complaint response in October 2021, the landlord advised that it was looking to possibly add the building to an earlier phase in its EWS1 programme. The landlord issued the EWS1 certificate to the resident in June 2022. This would suggest it did carry out the survey sooner than originally planned. It was reasonable for the landlord to carry out the survey sooner, however, the landlord did not communicate this decision to the resident. It would have been reasonable for it to share this decision with the resident at the time the decision was made.
Following the residents request to be provided with an EWS1 certificate, this Service has found there to have been service failure in the landlord’s communications with the resident. It was not clear in its email in September 2021, if the landlord was prepared to provide an EWS1 certificate or when it would next update him. There has been no evidence to show that there had been any further communications with the resident since October 2021. The resident needed to contact a councillor and this Service due to the landlord having not escalated his complaint or providing a further response. In recognition of its handling of this request the landlord must pay the resident £100 compensation.

The request to provide evidence of fire safety.

At the beginning of September 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to raise concerns about the report that they had made to it previously regarding the smoke shaft and shutters within the building. While it arranged for a Fire Risk Assessment and inspection to be carried out, it did not update the resident. This resulted in the resident contacting the landlord again. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have updated the resident sooner, as it would have assured him that it was taking his concerns seriously and given reassurance. The lack of communication from the landlord led the resident to make a complaint.
This Service has found maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request. It did not provide any evidence to support the buildings fire safety to alleviate the resident’s concerns, despite a number of requests. It told the resident in its stage one complaint response in October 2021, that it had carried out various inspections and Fire Risk Assessments, including a Type 4 Intrusive Assessment. It did not provide details of any assessment or report findings or actions it had or was going to take. It was clear from the resident’s communications why he wanted the information and the landlord showed little empathy and understanding to the resident, particularly given there had already been a fire in the building, only adding to his concern for the safety of the building. As a result, this Service is ordering the landlord to pay the resident £350 compensation in recognition of its inadequate handling of the residents requests.

Complaint handling

The resident emailed the landlord on 5 September 2021, and said that if it was unable to provide a date for when an EWS1 certificate would be provided a complaint should be recorded. It recorded this on 28 September 2021, this was 17 working days after the resident’s initial email. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will provide a stage one complaint response within ten working days. This shows the landlord did not follow its complaints policy or the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
The landlord provided its stage one complaint response to the resident’s complaint about the EWS1 certificate on 12 October 2021. It did not provide any confirmation that it would provide a further update to the resident once a decision had been made to when the survey would be carried out. The landlord should have provided a full and final stage one response including in its response to the resident when a survey would be completed, and when he could expect a copy of the certificate to be provided.
On 15 October 2021, the resident asked for their first complaint in relation to the EWS1 certificate to be escalated to stage two of the landlord’s complaints process, however, from the evidence seen by this Service the landlord failed to escalate the resident’s complaint. The landlord did not act in line with its complaints policy or the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code.
Following the residents further communications to this Service, we wrote to the landlord on 20 April 2022. We requested that the landlord contact the resident by 5 May 2022, to explain the status of their complaint in relation to the EWS1 certificate and tell them of how they could escalate this if they remained dissatisfied. This Service has seen no evidence to show that the landlord complied with the request to contact the resident or that it escalated the complaint to stage two of its complaints process. Under paragraph 5.9 of The Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code, it states that “if all or part of the complaint is not resolved to the residents satisfaction at stage one it must be progressed to stage two of the landlord’s procedure.”
The resident made a second complaint to the landlord in relation to their concerns over fire safety on 14 October 2021. They listed the points of their complaint and their desired outcomes. On 19 October 2021, the landlord advised the resident that it would provide a response within ten working days. On 1 November 2021, it advised the resident that it needed to extend the response date by a further ten working days, as more time was needed to investigate. This showed improvement in the landlord’s complaint monitoring and communication with the resident.
Its stage one complaint response to the resident’s complaint about fire safety, was issued on 15 November 2021. It said that the building had been passed as safe and some improvement works had been carried out, as a result of a type 4 Fire Risk Assessment. However, it did not provide any details of the improvement works identified or confirm when they had been completed. It did not address all points raised by the resident in the complaint or provide any supporting evidence of fire safety as requested. The landlord should have advised the resident that it would provide a full and final response upon completed of its review, and provided a date of when it would do this. The lack of detail in the response delayed the resident receiving the reassurance he wanted around the safety of his home.
The resident advised the landlord of their dissatisfaction with its stage one complaint response in relation to their complaint about fire safety, at the end of November 2021. On receipt of the residents dissatisfaction with the complaint response the landlord should have progressed the resident’s complaint to stage two of its complaints process. This escalation was not done until it received communication from this Service in March 2022, requesting it escalate the complaint to the next stage. The landlord did not follow its complaints process or the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code when handling this complaint and its actions caused a delay of over three months of the residents complaint being escalated to stage two of its process. This extended the period of concern around fire safety experienced by the resident.
It escalated the resident’s complaint to stage two of its process and advised a response would be provided by 14 April 2022. It extended its response timescales twice without reasonable explanation and provided its stage two response to the resident on 13 May 2022, 40 working days after its escalation. The resident had to wait almost five months for the landlord’s stage two response. This delay demonstrated a lack of empathy and understanding that the resident was seeking fire safety assurances following a fire in the building. This delay extended the residents concern for their safety in their home. The landlord’s offer of £50 compensation for does not reflect the delays in progressing the complaint as a whole, its poor communication, and the further distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
It advised that it had carried out a number of assessments to the building following the fire and said who had carried these out. While the landlord advised the resident of some of the actions it had taken, it did not provide details of any improvements found to be needed from the reports or the works that it had carried out and completed as a result. No written evidence was given or offered to the resident to support its response. This showed a lack of empathy for the resident’s concerns as it failed to offer detail which the resident was seeking and would have been reassuring.
This Service has found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling for both complaints. It did not follow its complaints procedure or the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code at various stages of the complaint handling, including not escalating the resident’s complaints when requested. The resident also had to contact the landlord on a number of occasions to advise of their continued dissatisfaction and involved this Service and an MP to try to resolve their complaints. This showed inadequate complaint handling and a lack of empathy and understanding to the resident for what was a distressing time for them following the fire. The landlord must pay the resident £350 for its handling of their complaints, this includes the £50 the landlord had originally offered. They must also pay the resident £100 for the time and trouble they incurred in trying to resolve their complaints.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in respect of the landlords:
1. Handling of request to provide evidence of fire safety.
2. Handling of the complaints.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in respect of the landlords:
1. Handling of the request for a copy of an EWS1 certificate

Reasons

The landlord failed to provide the resident with evidence to support the assessments/inspections findings and the actions it had taken after numerous requests.
The landlord failed to follow its complaints procedure timescales and those provided in the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code, for recording and responding to the resident’s complaints.
The landlord did not progress either of the resident’s complaints to the second stage of its complaints process at the time the resident made their request.
The landlord did not progress the resident’s complaint in relation to the EWS1 certificate to stage two of its complaints process or provide a further response.
The landlord failed to keep the resident updated on when and if they could expect to receive the EWS1 certificate.
Reasonable redress has not been offered by the landlord.

Orders

The landlord is ordered to take the following action within four weeks of the date of this report. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence that it has complied with these orders.
The landlord to pay the resident directly a total of £900. The reasons for this award have been broken down below:
1. £350 for distress caused by not providing sufficient evidence requested in relation to fire safety concerns.
2. £300 for the landlords complaint handling.
3. £100 for time and trouble the resident took to try to resolve their complaints.
4. £100 for the landlords failure to keep the resident updated with progress in providing the EWS1 certificate.
5. £50 offered by the landlord in its stage two response, if not already paid.
A senior manager must write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report. The landlords apology should:
1. Acknowledge the maladministration.
2. Accept responsibility for it.
3. Explain clearly why it happened.
4. Express sincere regret.
5. Where appropriate, include assurances that the same maladministration should not occur again and set out what steps have been taken to assure this.
The letter must also advise the resident of the landlords assessment of these three specific points raised by the resident below, confirming any remedial actions taken following Fire Risk Assessments or reports made. It should also confirm that it is satisfied that the current statutory or regulatory requirements are met or advise of any proposed works and timescales for remediation if not.
1. The ventilation system is safe and works in the way that it should, in line with the legal or regulatory requirements.
2. The number of smoke detectors on floors four and five are compliant with any legal or regulatory requirements.
3. That the smoke detectors have been tested/checked regularly and confirm when the last test was carried out, how often these will be done in future and confirm how these are recorded.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. Consider providing additional staff training in relation to the appropriate timescales for complaint handling and response writing, so that complaints are dealt with in line with its policy and the Complaint Handling Code provided by this Service.