We are updating our systems this weekend. You will be unable to submit an online complaint form from Friday 3 April until Monday 6 April.

Normal services will resume on Tuesday 7 April.

Thank you for your patience.

Stevenage Borough Council (202325937)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325937

Stevenage Borough Council

31 July 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 resident’s request to the landlord to fit more storage cupboards and cover exposed gas pipes in the property’s kitchen.

Background

  1. The resident has been the secure tenant of the landlord at the property since 2018. She lives there with her partner and 3 children.
  2. In or around June 2023 the resident became concerned that the property’s kitchen was too small. She asked the landlord when the kitchen was due to be replaced. It said the kitchen had been replaced in 2012 and was not due for replacement until 2032.
  3. On 11 July 2023 the resident made a stage 1 complaint to the landlord. She said that she wanted the kitchen to be put back to the “original size”. The resident says she meant by this that the kitchen had been reduced in size by previous tenants and she wanted it to be bigger as it did not have adequate space for her growing family.
  4. The landlord responded at stage 1 of its process on 21 July 2023. It said the kitchen was in good condition and suitably sized for a 3-bed house. It noted that the resident would have seen the kitchen when she signed her tenancy agreement.
  5. The resident asked to escalate her complaint. She said there were many issues with the kitchen. It had a lack of surface and cupboard space. The radiator behind the fridge/freezer could not be used and she was concerned about an exposed gas pipe. She said two of her children suffered with disabilities and did not like confined space. She provided photographs of her neighbour’s kitchen compared to hers.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its process on 14 September 2023. It said it had reviewed the photographs she had sent and continued to consider that the kitchen was an appropriate size. It said she had a pantry for extra storage. Nonetheless, it said it would box-in the pipework and move the radiator from behind the fridge. It suggested she apply for an occupational therapist assessment to address her concerns about how the kitchen layout might affect her children’s disabilities.
  7. The resident asked the Ombudsman to investigate.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident told the Ombudsman that when a contractor attended to complete boxing work to cover the gas pipe, he said he was unable to do the work and left. We have not seen any records to show that she has complained formally about this to the landlord and so it does not form part of our investigation. After she has made a complaint to the landlord about this issue and exhausted its complaint process, she has the option then of asking the Ombudsman to investigate.

The resident’s request to the landlord to fit more storage cupboards and cover exposed gas pipes in the kitchen.

  1. The landlord’s Housing Standards statement says that it aims for all its homes to have reasonable modern facilities and to be in good working order. It says that under the Decent Homes Standard (the Standard), the Government defines a modern kitchen as less than 30 years old. It says it replaces its kitchens every 20 years.
  2. While it is not in the Ombudsman’s remit to decide if a property meets the Standard, the Standard actually says that a reasonably modern kitchen should be 20 years old or less. Nonetheless, the landlord explained the kitchen was last replaced in 2012 and is due for replacement in 2032. That was in line with the Standard’s 20-year guidance.
  3. The resident was concerned that her neighbour’s kitchen was larger and had more storage space than her own. She believed that her kitchen had been reduced in size by previous tenants. However, the landlord was right to say, in its stage 1 response, that when the resident viewed the property at the beginning of her tenancy, she accepted it as it was at that point. It also said that if she wanted to make alterations, she could do so, at her own cost and providing she obtained permission from the landlord.
  4. At stage 2 of its complaint’s process, the landlord showed it had properly considered the resident’s complaint by setting out its analysis of the photographs she provided, especially in regard to the number of kitchen units. Its Housing Standards statement says that when it provides a new kitchen, “it will have 8 kitchen units (or no less than your current number.” This suggests that there is no minimum for the current number of kitchen units. However, in any event, the landlord demonstrated that it had considered whether the current number of units was reasonable.
  5. The landlord noted that some of the wall units (that had been visible in a prior survey) were not “very visible” in the resident’s photographs. It considered the kitchen size was suitable and added that there was a pantry. This demonstrated it had given proper consideration to the resident’s concerns and was, therefore, a reasonable response to her complaint.
  6. The landlord also addressed the resident’s concerns about how the kitchen size might affect her children’s disabilities by suggesting she could obtain an occupational therapist assessment. Again, this was an appropriate response to her concerns because with such an assessment the resident would be able to support and clarify her concern.
  7. Further, the landlord, in response to the issues the resident raised at stage 2 of the complaint, responded appropriately to her service requests to address the issue with the radiator and exposed gas pipe. The records show it visited to remove the radiator on 26 September 2023 and to complete boxing-in work on 18 October 2023. As noted above, if the landlord did not complete the boxing-in work as its records indicate, the resident should report this to the landlord and raise a formal complaint, if necessary.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in regard to this complaint.