The Guinness Partnership Limited (202220012)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220012

The Guinness Partnership Limited

31 October 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of plastering repairs.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord living in a two-bed flat. The tenancy began in October 1981 and was assigned to the resident, via a mutual exchange on 28 August 2017.
4. The resident states that he has raised complaints about sections of replastering within  the property since late 2017. The landlord’s records indicate that the resident has raised formal complaints since November 2020. This included plastering in his hallway and around a window in his bedroom, which was also due to be repaired as it could not open, even sufficiently to allow cleaning to take place. It is not disputed by either party that this has been a longstanding issue.
5. The resident has raised at least 8 complaints which have been considered as part of this investigation. In July 2023, the landlord met with the resident and conducted a review of all past complaints as many overlapped in the issues being considered. These complaints, and their responses, are outlined below:
   1. The first complaint within the scope of this investigation was raised on 13 May 2022, having been re-opened from November 2021 when it was closed in error. The landlord responded on 19 May and 9 June 2022 at stage 1 and 2 respectively. The complaint related to delays in repair works, including the plastering and was upheld by the landlord. The landlord apologised for the delay and offered £475 compensation.
   2. The second complaint was raised on 16 June 2022 and the landlord responded on 30 June and 26 July 2022 at stage 1 and 2 respectively. This complaint related to the plastering repairs still being outstanding. The landlord apologised for the delays and offered £20 compensation.
   3. The third complaint was raised on 29 June 2022 and was initially refused by the landlord in a response on 1 July 2022. The complaint, which again related to outstanding works, was addressed as part of a fourth complaint that was raised on 20 June 2022. In this response, which combined both issues, the landlord apologised for the confusion, as it believed the works had been completed at a previous appointment. The landlord initially offered £20 compensation and later increased this to £85 compensation in its stage 2 response
   4. The fifth complaint was raised on 15 July 2022 and the landlord responded on 19 July and 25 August 2022 at stage 1 and 2 respectively. There was a small delay in issuing the final response in this case and the landlord apologised for this and paid compensation. This complaint related to delays in completing a repair to a window, which the resident attributes to the contractor not being able to open the window as the plastering had not been completed and therefore the wall was out of square.
   5. The sixth complaint related to an unannounced contractor attending the resident’s property to repair the window and complete the plastering. The complaint was raised on 20 September 2022 and the landlord issued its responses on 5 October and 18 October 2022 respectively. The landlord’s response was issued 1 working day over timescale. The landlord offered £25 compensation for the delays to repairs and a further £25 for errors in communication.
   6. The penultimate complaint was raised on 3 October 2022 following a text message being sent in error to the resident, which advised of an incorrect appointment. The landlord issued its responses on 17 October and 26 October 2022, along with an apology for the error and offer of £25 compensation.
   7. The final complaint made by the resident,  was raised on 18 November 2022. This is the primary complaint being considered as part of this determination. This complaint was refused in error by the landlord, as it felt it had previously replied in full through other complaint responses. The landlord also, incorrectly, stated that this element of the resident’s complaint (related to plastering) was already being considered by the Ombudsman. Ultimately, this complaint was addressed through a later complaint response, issued in August 2023, which upheld the complaint and awarded the resident £510 compensation for the delays and poor handling of the issue.
6. The resident remained dissatisfied after the initial response to his final complaint and escalated his complaint to the Ombudsman on 5 January 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

7. Although it is noted that there is a long history of repair requests by the resident, this investigation has primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s recent reports from January 2022 onwards that were considered during the landlord’s recent complaint responses. This is because residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner and then escalate these complaints to our service whilst they are still ‘live’, if they remain dissatisfied. This ensures that the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred.
8. Given that the resident escalated his complaint to our service in January 2023, it is reasonable to consider one year prior to this only, in the interest of fairness to both parties.
9. Alongside this, the resident has another complaint with the landlord related to damp and mould within the property. Whilst this determination will not make a finding on this, as it is subject to a different investigation, it is noted that the issues are inter-related, as the issues with the plastering and window contributed to the ongoing repairs to resolve the wider damp and mould issue.

Plastering repairs

10. The presenting issues in this case were delays to plastering works in the resident’s bedroom, near the window and the hallway. The delays to works in the bedroom also contributed to delays in having the window repaired, as the installers stated that the window could not be fully accessed or opened whilst the walls were out of square.
11. The landlord’s responsive repair policy categorises repairs into two levels; emergency and routine repairs. The landlord commits to repairing these issues within 24 hours or 28 calendar days respectively. In both cases, the landlord states that it aims to complete repairs on the first visit wherever possible.
12. In addition to this, the landlord is responsible for repairs to the walls, boundary walls and windows under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, once it is notified of the issue by a resident. Landlords are responsible for ensuring that repairs made are lasting and effective in all cases.
13. The plastering repairs were completed by the landlord on 9 September 2023. This amounts to an unreasonable delay of over 19 months outside of the landlord’s policy timescales in progressing the repairs from January 2022 to completion.
14. The delays caused the resident distress and inconvenience in needing to allow access to  the property on many occasions. In reviewing the evidence, there were several factors which contributed to the delays in the plastering works being completed and these are outlined below:
    1. The scope of works were not correctly recorded or communicated to contractors. This led to contractors attending to complete partial works. In particular, it is noted that contractors attended to repair a window in the resident’s bedroom, however this was not able to proceed until the plastering works had been completed. On one occasion, the evidence shows that the resident did not permit any works to go ahead, as he did not want to take time off from work for a small repair item, when he believed the works should have been more extensive.
    2. There were at least two occasions when the appointments booked were not attended to or communicated correctly. On one occasion, a contractor arrived outside of the appointment window, whilst the resident was at work. On another occasion, an appointment text message was sent in error by the landlord’s IT system, causing confusion for the resident.
    3. There was generally poor communication with the resident around booked appointments. This included one appointment where a contractor arrived unannounced and the landlord’s customer services department could not find a record of any appointment being booked, nor could it advise why the contractor may have been attending.
    4. On one occasion, there is evidence that a contractor left the resident’s property prematurely, prior to completing the work, as the “resident was rude to him”. The resident disputes this account.
15. The landlord conducted a complaint review in July 2023 and identified many of these failings itself. In recognition of this, the landlord apologised, shared its lessons learnt and offered the resident £510 compensation. This was in addition to the compensation offered in previous complaint responses, which totaled £655.
16. Overall, there were considerable delays to the repairs being completed, which undoubtably caused the resident additional distress and inconvenience and further exacerbated an ongoing damp and mould issue. Whilst the landlord has since awarded further compensation of £510 and apologised for the delays, this offered little remedy to the resident following many years of complaints. It is also noted that the review took place in July 2023 and the substantive repair was still not completed until 9 September 2023, a further two months.
17. Taking these factors together, this amounts to maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repairs to plastering within the resident’s property, for which the landlord’s existing remedy is not sufficient.

Complaint handling

18. The landlord operates a two-stage complaint process. The landlord’s complaint policy outlines that it will acknowledge all complaints within 2 working days and issues responses within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
19. Within the 8 complaint responses reviewed by this service, there have been a number of issues identified. The landlord also identified several of these issues through its complaint review in July 2023. The issues included the following:
    1. Delays to complaint responses being issued, although it is noted that this was only by 1 working day on two occasions.
    2. Complaints being incorrectly refused or cancelled. There were examples of complaints being closed as the landlord believed they had already been investigated, when this was not the case.
    3. A lack of explanation of how findings had been reached, why responses were delayed or how compensation had been calculated. The landlord identified these failings in its review of the resident’s complaints.
    4. Confusion around what matters were being investigated. This led to some responses not fully addressing complaint points raised or incorrectly closing elements of complaints, as it believed they had already been addressed.
    5. A very poor referencing system that uses different complaint reference numbers for each stage of the complaint. This makes tracking complaints and identifying which complaints stages are related very difficult for all parties and this should be reviewed.
20. Overall, there have been significant failings in the landlord’s complaint handling processes over a protracted period. It was positive to note that the landlord undertook a review of the resident’s complaints and provided him with a list of their findings and lessons learnt, as a result. Alongside this, it is noted that the landlord re-considered the complaint it had closed incorrectly and apologised for the failings found in connection with this. The resident was also advised that any complaints raised between the time of the review and 24 January 2024 would be given priority and addressed by a senior complaints and resolution specialist at stage 1 and reviewed by a manager should they escalate to stage 2.
21. Whilst these are useful steps that go some way to addressing the complaint handling issues, there has been no evidence of compensation paid to the resident that specifically takes account of the delays, time and trouble, and issues in the landlord’s complaint handling. This is not proportionate with the levels of delay in this case, particularly given that this frustrated the complaints process and delayed the resident from being able to escalate his complaint to this service. It may also have been fairer for the landlord to have not accepted further complaints related to the plastering and, instead, more actively referred the resident, at an earlier stage, to the Ombudsman for a determination.
22. Taking these factors together, overall the landlord’s complaint process did not support the resident with progressing and resolving his issues, and at times only served to further complicate the process. This amounts to a service failure, for which the landlord is ordered to pay compensation and recommended to take further steps to prevent a reoccurrence.

Determination

23. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there has been:
    1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the plastering.
    2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

24. Within 28 days of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Arrange for a senior officer to apologise to the resident in writing.
    2. Pay the resident £500 compensation comprised of:
       1. £350 compensation for the delays in completing the plastering repairs. This is to recognise the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble taken to progress this matter.
       2. £150 compensation for its poor complaint handling.
       3. All previous awards of compensation offered in the complaint responses highlighted in this determination must also be paid in full, if the landlord has not already done so.
    3. Provide the resident (and this service) a progress report on the actions it identified in its complaint handling review, which was undertaken in July 2023.
25. Within 8 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Initiate and complete a strategic review of the learning from this case to ensure that adequate oversight  is in place to ensure the correct sequencing of works and that appointments are correctly made, confirmed with residents, and kept.
26. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders within the respective timescales.

Recommendations

27. Within 28 days of the date of this determination, the landlord should:
    1. Review its complaint handling processes to ensure that complaints are recorded and progressed in a clear manner, in line with the landlord’s policy and timescales. It should ensure that meaningful references are given to complaint responses that enable them to be tracked through to completion by the landlord, its residents, and this service.