Sovereign Housing Association Limited (202121336)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202121336

Sovereign Housing Association Limited

14 April 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 response to the resident’s request for battens to be installed to her home.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 3-bedroom house.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord to request for battens to be fitted to her property. The resident’s reason for wanting these changes was because she did not have privacy in the property, installing the battens would have allowed curtains to be hung and resulted in the home maintaining heat better.  
  3. The resident states it was agreed for 10 battens to be fitted on 29 October 2021, however she had to cancel the appointment. When the resident further chased for this work to be done, she was informed it would not be possible.
  4. In response, the resident raised a complaint to the landlord stating she had proof that a neighbouring property had battens. Her concerns were that her property was not up to the same standards as her neighbour, but she paid the same rent.
  5. On 13 December 2021, the landlord issued its stage one response stating that as the request is not a responsive repair it was unable to undertake this type of work. The resident disputed this. However, the landlord upheld its decision in its stage two response on 15 December 2021 and explained that after reviewing its worklogs it was unable to find an example of battens being approved for the neighbouring property.
  6. The resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s outcome and therefore brought the complaint to this Service. The resident’s desired outcome is for battens to be fitted to the property.

Assessment and findings

  1. In reference to the tenancy agreement and section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is responsible for the structure and repairs to the property.
  2. The resident informed the landlord of her reasons for wanting battens fitted to the property, she states the landlord had agreed and arranged for this to be done. However, she cancelled the appointment due to an unconfirmed covid case on the day. Since then, the landlord has refused to add battens to the property.
  3. The landlord’s reasons for not accepting the resident’s request is that it is not a responsive repair. Section 4.1 of the repairs and maintenance policy sets out what a responsive repair is. It states, “repairs are for an existing feature or element of the home that requires a repair so it continues to work or function”. In this case, as the resident is asking for a new feature to be added to her home that was not present prior to her tenancy agreement starting, this is not considered to be a responsive repair and therefore the landlord is within its right to deny the resident’s request.
  4. This Service understands that the resident says another tenant has battens fitted to its property, and it is important for a landlord to treat tenants fairly and consistently; however, our main consideration is the resident’s property and whether the landlord is following its obligations. Based on a review of the law and landlord’s policies there is no evidence to show that the landlord is obligated to fit battens to the property. Furthermore, whilst there may battens in another property, it is noted that these may have been fitted by either the current or a previous resident. Irrespective of who fitted them, it remains the case that the landlord has no obligation to provide window battens in the properties it lets.
  5. It is noted that the landlord does not usually fit curtain battens as the metal lintels above the window would not allow them to drill into the wall. As the landlord is liable for the structure of the property, it is within its discretion to make any amendments to the property that are considered an improvement instead of repair. In this case, there are structural reasons why the landlord would not usually do this work.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Service there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for battens to be installed to her home.

Reasons

  1. The landlord’s reasons for refusing the resident’s request were in line with its guidelines. Whilst the Ombudsman understands the resident’s reasons for making the request, the work requested is an improvement rather than a repair and the landlord was under no obligation to carry out this work.