The Guinness Partnership Limited (202221769)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202221769

The Guinness Partnership Limited

30 January 2024

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 reports concerning:
1. The lettings process including the viewing and sign-up process.
2. The condition of the property when let, including outstanding repairs and the condition of the garden and overgrown trees.
3. Repairs required at the property.
4. The associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a bungalow.
The local council sent a nomination for the property on 20 July 2022 with the resident listed as a nominee.
The landlord completed a post void (empty property) inspection on 28 July 2022 which stated that the property was ready to let.
The landlord emailed the resident on 4 August 2022 with a viewing appointment for 5 August 2022. The landlord sent a further email on 5 September 2022 with a formal offer and details of a sign-up appointment that had been arranged on 8 September 2022. It requested that the resident sign the tenancy agreement and pay 2 weeks’ rent in advance prior to the appointment.
The resident submitted a complaint on 12 September 2022 along with a number of photographs. The resident stated on inspecting the property at the sign-up appointment that it was not let to a lettable standard as there were several outstanding repairs required. He had advised the landlord before taking the property that garden maintenance was required to address overgrown bushes and trees. He advised that the landlord had also failed to remove rubbish from the loft. As a remedy, the resident requested a refund of 2 weeks’ rent as compensation in respect of the emotional and mental stress and travel expenses due to procedures not being followed correctly. He also asked for the repairs to be completed quickly.
The resident emailed the landlord on 22 September 2022, requesting that the landlord consider additional complaint issues with regard to the lettings process. He stated that according to the local council’s lettings scheme that applied, an applicant should be given “at least 7 days’ notice to view a property”. He reported that the gas engineer attended and advised him that the internal gas pipe had not been closed off which could have led to a gas leak. He advised that the landlord had also failed to cap the outlet pipe for the washing machine and that this had caused flooding in the kitchen.
The landlord sent its stage one complaint response on 30 September 2022. The landlord partially upheld the resident’s complaint. It advised that the property had not met its lettable standard and some of the works should have been completed prior to the resident taking up the tenancy. It had raised works orders and had requested its contractor to make an appointment to complete the outstanding repairs on 30 September 2022. However, the resident had wished to receive the landlord’s complaint response before the works would be undertaken. It advised that the lettings process was correctly followed, and it found no failings in this respect. It apologised and offered a rent rebate of one week of £109.35. It provided feedback to its contractor to ensure properties meet the re-let standards.
The resident emailed the landlord on 12 October 2022 as he was dissatisfied with the landlord’s stage one response. He disagreed with the compensation award and asked the landlord to review this. He stated that he had since reported other repair that had emerged after he moved into the property. These repairs had been booked in for 14 October 2022. He advised that the stress had impacted on his health.
The landlord’s internal email of 13 October 2022 listed snagging repairs from the time the property was empty, along with some other reported repairs to the shower pole, kitchen tap, and noisy bathroom pipework. It stated that repairs were booked in between 14 October 2022 and 27 October 2022.
The landlord emailed its contractor on 25 October 2022.The landlord said that it was unclear what work had been carried out. It detailed repairs that the resident had reported were outstanding. This included external tiling, silicone waterproof sealing around the kitchen sink, sealing in the bathroom, external gaps around the perimeter walls of the bungalow, and gaps in the paving that required cementing. The landlord requested that the operative contact it once the repairs were completed so it could speak to the resident to ensure that all the work was complete.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 18 November 2022. In this, the landlord:
1. Advised that it could not find any failings in the lettings process.
2. It apologised that the property was not let to a lettable standard.
3. It listed the resident’s reported repairs when the property was let, and subsequent repairs required along with completion dates and proposed completion dates. It confirmed that it would be erect a 6-foot fence on one section of fencing as requested by the resident on 30 November 2022 and would remove the loft rubbish on 24 November 2022.
4. It would contact the resident again after 30 November 2022 to ensure that all of the repairs were completed.
5. It awarded £150 compensation comprising £50 for delays in completing repairs, £50 for stress and inconvenience, £25 for time and trouble spent pursuing the complaint and £25 for the delay in providing a stage 2 complaint response.
The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response and referred his complaint to the Ombudsman on 14 December 2022.

Events following the end of the landlord’s internal complaints process

The resident phoned the landlord on 20 December 2022 listing a number of outstanding works. He stated that no one from the maintenance service had been in touch with him. The landlord chased up works with its contractor of 10 January 2023. Its contractor advised that the work was no longer bookable and requested new works orders for guttering, a bathroom window lock and a repair to address water pressure from the kitchen mixer tap. The landlord arranged an appointment with the resident for snagging works to the window locks on 9 February 2023. The resident phoned the landlord on 9 February 2023 as no one had turned up.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 26 June 2023 after the Ombudsman had contacted it to advise that the resident’s complaint had been accepted for investigation. The landlord apologised for further delays in completing repairs required following its stage 2 complaint response. It increased its offer of compensation to £500 comprising £475 for time, trouble and inconvenience caused by the delays in completing the repairs following its stage 2 complaint response, and £25 in respect of poor communication.
The resident emailed the Ombudsman on 2 July 2023 and advised that the outstanding repairs had finally been completed. However, he reported that the issue reported concerning the overgrown trees was still outstanding.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

Paragraph 42(c) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were not brought to the attention of the member (landlord) as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 6 months of the matter arising. In accordance with paragraph 42(c) of the Scheme, for the purpose of this investigation the timescale considered is 6 months prior to the resident’s formal complaint to his landlord of 12 September 2022.
The resident has since submitted a further formal complaint concerning antisocial behaviour that has not exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process. He may be able to bring this further complaint to the Ombudsman if he remains dissatisfied once the complaint has exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process. Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s (landlord’s) complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
The resident has referred to the impact of the damp and mould on hers and her husband’s health. Damp and mould issues are widely reported as having a negative impact on the health of residents. However, the Ombudsman is unable to draw conclusions on specifically how the resident’s health may have been affected by any errors made by the landlord. Claims of personal injury ultimately, are better suited for courts or liability insurers to decide. The Ombudsman can however consider the overall detriment, inconvenience and time and trouble experienced by the resident due to a landlord’s failings as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health.

Policies and procedures

According to the tenancy agreement, the resident is required to pay the weekly rent and service charge in advance. The resident must provide access to the landlord, agents or contractors upon 24 hours’ notice, except in an emergency to inspect the property and carry out repairs.
According to the tenancy agreement, the landlord is required to carry out repairs to the outside and structure of the resident’s property. This includes the roof, drains, gutters and external pipes, outside doors and walls, windows, internal walls, floors and ceilings (excluding painting and decoration), pathways, steps, boundary walls and fences present at the start of the tenancy. The landlord is required to repair installations for heating, water heating and sanitation.
The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. At stage one it will respond within 10 working days. It will respond at stage 2 within 20 working days. The policy states that where additional time is needed it will explain this to the complainant and provide a date when a response will be sent.
The landlord’s compensation policy details that it may offer compensation in respect of service failures. For example, for distress and inconvenience between £250 to £700+ may be offered depending on the timescale to resolve the issue and extent of the inconvenience, along with the impact and potential distress caused.
The landlord’s responsive repairs policy details that it will attend to emergency repairs within 24 hours and routine repairs within 28 days. The landlord will ensure that trees and bushes are at a reasonable height and span at the start of a tenancy. It then expects residents to maintain these throughout the tenancy. The landlord will repair boundary fences, but residents are responsible for repair or replacing dividing fences (between 2 rented properties).
According to the landlord’s lettings procedure, the landlord will confirm internally whether an applicant accepts the property or not within 24 hours of the viewing being completed. It details that a tenancy can start on any day and that this should be agreed with the applicant “taking into account that the letting should be completed as quickly as possible”.
The property was let through a local council lettings scheme that allows residents to move from a city to a rural location. According to the scheme, an applicant should have up to 48 hours (excluding weekends) from viewing the property to decide if they wish to accept it.
The landlord’s empty home repair standards details the requirements of empty properties to meet before being let. It details that gardens are to be cleared of heavy undergrowth, e.g. bushes, shrubs and small trees and that trees affecting the property and/or mature trees should be dealt with outside of the voids (empty property) process. It requires any fences that are damaged to be replaced. It states that any trip hazards should be addressed on pathways and steps and patch repairs or relaying of paths outside where needed. It provides details room by room of the required standards to be achieved. This also includes rubbish removal from any previous occupant. This information is restated in the landlord’s re-let standard guide for new tenants.

The resident’s reports of the landlord’s handling of the lettings process including the viewing and sign-up process

The landlord let the property to the resident through a nomination from the local council through a specific scheme as above. According to this scheme, the landlord should have given at least 7 days’ notice to the resident to view the property. However, the landlord requested a next day viewing in its phone call to the resident on 2 August 2022. The local council had to therefore remind the landlord concerning the timescale. The landlord gave the resident a little more time to view the property which was then more appropriate. The viewing took place on 5 August 2022. Whilst it is appreciated that the landlord would wish to let the property as soon as possible, it made an error in administering the local council scheme. The landlord needed to consider a more person-centred approach to its lettings processes particularly where applicants, such as the resident, were travelling some distance to attend and needed to make necessary arrangements. This was therefore inappropriate in this case although the error was corrected quickly so the impact of this error would not have been significant.
The resident stated in his complaints that he felt pressured to view the property as he had been advised that if he did not view the property, he could lose it. He reported the same pressure to sign the tenancy agreement and to pay the 2 weeks rent in advance which was prior to his sign-up appointment of 8 September 2022. The landlord’s email of 5 October 2022 to the resident advised that its lettings officers have the right to request an urgent viewing. The landlord stated that there are no legal rules around viewings. It also advised that its lettings officer can consider discretion in respect of the signing of the tenancy agreement and that this would be discussed at the time. The Ombudsman has seen no documentary evidence that the landlord applied pressure to the resident to view and sign up to the property urgently or risk losing it. There is evidence that the landlord investigated the allegation with its lettings team. An internal email of 13 October 2022 advised that no pressure was applied to the resident at the time. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s testimony but where there are conflicting accounts of events without any documentary evidence to support either account, it is not possible for the Ombudsman to establish what happened. The landlord had acted reasonably by investigating the allegation.
There was a gap between the viewing taking place on 5 August 2022 and the sign-up appointment that had been arranged for 8 September 2022. The landlord explained that this was due to waiting for a reference from the resident’s previous landlord. The landlord subsequently approved the application in the absence of the reference as this had not been provided, which was reasonable. However, the Ombudsman has seen no records of that the landlord gave any update to keep the resident informed of the status of the offer. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to explain its expectations in terms of the timescale and process to sign up for the property throughout to help manage the resident’s expectations. In addition, there is no record of the landlord responding to the resident’s email of 10 August 2022, in which he had asked some specific questions concerning the tenancy. This was a failing and it would have caused the resident unnecessary concern as to the status of the tenancy, given the lack of response.
There was therefore service failure in respect of the lack of communication to the resident and in respect of the landlord’s error in adhering to the applicable lettings scheme. The Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance sets out the Ombudsman’s approach for cases of service failure. Service failure can include delay in getting matters resolved and failings to acknowledge and put things right. The Remedies Guidance suggests that for cases of service failure that compensation of between £50 to £100 is appropriate. In this instance, £100 compensation is appropriate to reflect the delay in responding to the resident about the issue.

The resident’s reports of the landlord’s handling of the condition of the property when let including the condition of the garden and overgrown trees

The landlord carried out a pre and post void inspection on the property as would be expected. It had undertaken a number of repairs to the property however, the landlord’s records were unclear exactly what had been completed. The post void inspection undertaken on 28 July 2022 was insufficiently detailed. It contained a number of photographs, and it can be seen from these that rubbish and debris had been cleared from the shed and garden. However, there is no mention of the window lock keys, or the rubbish that had been left in the loft. Photographs of rooms did not detail which room this was, for example, a bedroom or lounge etc. The landlord’s record keeping was therefore insufficiently robust and this was a failing.
Accurate and complete records ensure that the landlord has a good understanding of the age and condition of the structure and its fittings within the property, enable outstanding repairs to be monitored and managed, and enable the landlord to provide accurate information to residents and to the Ombudsman upon request. Inaccurate or incomplete records can make it difficult for the Ombudsman to determine whether a landlord has fulfilled its repair responsibilities. In the absence of clear records, the Ombudsman may be unable to conclude that the landlord has acted in line with its obligations. This may result in a finding of service failure or maladministration against the landlord. The landlord should therefore complete a self-assessment of its record keeping practices using the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (May 2023) available on our website. It should use this to improve its record keeping practices.
The resident’s email of 10 August 2022, prior to him taking up the tenancy, alerted the landlord to the overgrown bushes and trees that were expanding over the roof and guttering. The Ombudsman has not seen a response to this email as mentioned above, or that the landlord raised any works order concerning the report at the time. This was a failing as the landlord needed to ensure that the property met its empty property standards as above.
The resident’s stage one complaint of 12 September 2022 detailed the outstanding repairs that needed to be undertaken throughout the property and externally. The resident reported further issues in his email of 22 September 2022. One of the issued missed whilst the property was empty led to a flood in the kitchen as the landlord had failed to cap the washing machine outlet pipe. The resident also reported that the landlord’s gas engineer had advised on 21 September 2022 that it was just as well the external gas pipe had been capped as the internal gas pipe had not been capped and sealed and that this could have caused a gas leak. This was concerning, though as the external gas pipe had been capped the risk of this happening was unlikely. It was clearly of concern to the resident though, and it would have been appropriate for the landlord to address this specific point. The landlord did not provide this reassurance. There was failure of the landlord as its communication could have been better to allay the resident’s concerns regarding gas safety. It had also failed to ensure that the property was let to its relet standard. This may have given the resident the impression that the landlord was not listening to him or taking his concerns seriously.
The landlord raised some but not all of the resident’s reported issues on 26 September 2022. It did attempt to book in the repairs to be completed on 30 September 2022, however, the resident had requested on 27 September 2022 that the repairs be paused pending the outcome of his complaint. This meant that the landlord would have been unable to progress the repairs at this point. The landlord stated in its stage one complaint response of 30 September 2022 that its contractor would book in the repairs. As the landlord did attempt to book in the repairs initially within a satisfactory timescale, and then took steps to book in the repairs following its stage one complaint response this was a reasonable action to take at this point. However, the landlord needed to make sure that it captured all of the resident’s outstanding repairs, for example, the sealant required around the bath and kitchen sink was missed which was a service failing.
The repairs to a broken shower rail, lower kitchen plinths and a kitchen socket were completed between 14 and 27 October 2022. These repairs were therefore completed within the landlord’s repairs policy timescales. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response of 18 November 2022 stated that the remaining internal repairs were scheduled to be completed between 24 and 28 November 2022. However, there was some delay in scheduling these works which was by this point over and above the landlord’s repairs policy timescale. It was evident from the landlord’s records that there continued to be delays in progressing the outstanding internal repairs. For example, a repair to the window locks reported on 26 September 2022 had not been completed. The resident was concerned regarding security which was understandable. The landlord phoned its contractor on 10 January 2023 but was advised of the need re-raise the works order for this. The landlord had phoned the resident on 3 February 2023, which was a delayed response, following the resident’s chase up to arrange an appointment for 9 February 2023. The resident reported that the landlord’s contractor did not turn up. This would have caused the resident considerable inconvenience, time and trouble in waiting in for a contactor to attend along with the distress caused by the fact that the repairs were already unreasonably delayed.
The landlord did agree to erect a 6-foot dividing fence in its stage 2 complaint response of which was reasonable as according to the tenancy agreement it was not strictly obliged to provide this, but only to repair an existing fence. It is not clear when this was completed as the repair records are incomplete and do not provide the completion date. It states that the contractor tried to phone the landlord to advise of the completion, and that the resident was happy with the fence however it was unable to get through. Whilst the Ombudsman does not have a specific date of completion, it is evident that the work was completed, and the resident and landlord have reported all the agreed work has been completed. As such there is no further action that the landlord is required to take with regard to the fence.
The landlord’s internal email of 14 November 2022 indicated that its maintenance contractor’s contract was ending. It stated that the complaint had occurred as its contractor had failed to complete several of the repairs during the void process. This had led to the resident having to report the issues himself and he had inconvenience of making himself available for appointments.
Despite these issues, the landlord was ultimately responsible for checking that the work had been completed satisfactorily, for example, during its post void inspection, which it failed to do. In effect the resident was caught in the middle of the issues and processes between the landlord and its contractor. As such, the landlord needed to take definitive action, such as the action suggested in its internal email of 14 November 2022 to instruct a sub-contractor. However, the landlord failed to take this course of action which caused unnecessary inconvenience, time and trouble and distress to the resident. It was evident from the resident’s phone call of 20 December 2022 and the landlord’s internal email of 4 January 2023 that repairs were still outstanding.
There was delay in completion of the external works with regard to the paving, step and gaps in the external walls. The resident’s chase up email of 20 December 2022 indicated that the remaining external work was still outstanding. The landlord’s repair records indicate that these repairs were still outstanding as of 27 January 2023, over a month later. Whilst the landlord’s internal emails of 15 December 2022 and 4 January 2023 checking if the repairs were completed may have been appropriate, the fact that they had to be sent indicated further issues with the landlord’s record keeping and its communication. This was due to the fact that the landlord was unable to determine whether the repairs had been completed or not.
The landlord should have been more proactive in updating the resident, given the ongoing issues. The landlord could have also sent its own surveyor to check the status of the works, however the Ombudsman has seen no record that this happened which was a failing.
After the Ombudsman contacted the landlord for information, the landlord offered additional compensation to the resident of £500 in its letter of 26 June 2023 in respect of the further delay in completing the outstanding snagging repairs. In this case, the compensation offered, does not, provide sufficient redress for the distress and inconvenience and the time and trouble caused to the resident by the landlord’s identified failings.
The landlord confirmed to the Ombudsman that it had to use its in-house repairs team to complete the works and that all of the repairs were completed by 13 June 2023. This was 39 weeks after the resident’s stage one complaint of 12 September 2022. The delays were excessive and not in accordance with the landlord’s repairs policy as above. It was therefore appropriate that the landlord apologised for these failings in its complaint responses. The Ombudsman has considered the level of rent paid throughout the matter being outstanding. The rent was £109.35 per week. The resident had some benefit of living in the property during that time, and therefore was liable for the rent in accordance with his tenancy agreement. Taking this into account, the Ombudsman has ordered the landlord to pay compensation of 10% of the rent charged during this period, excluding one week when the resident requested that the works be paused as the landlord was unable to complete the works at this time. Over the 38 week period the total rent payable was £4,155.30. Compensation payable for this loss of enjoyment and amenity is therefore £415.53.
There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the condition of the property when it was let, due to the failings and errors identified. The Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance as referenced above, sets out this Ombudsman’s approach to compensation in respect of maladministration. Maladministration can include a landlord’s failure to comply with its own policies and procedures, unreasonable delays in dealing with a matter, and behaving unfairly, unreasonably or incompetently. The Remedies Guidance suggests compensation from £100 to £1000 is appropriate for instances of maladministration by a landlord. In this instance, along with the rent rebate of £415.53, further compensation of £200 is appropriate, to reflect the detriment, inconvenience and time and trouble caused to the resident in having to pursue the matter. This is a total of £615.53.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs required at the property

The resident reported a number of additional repairs following his stage one complaint on 3 October 2022 that were needed to the property that were separate to the void works that have been considered above. This included work to unblock a drain, and low water pressure from the kitchen tap.
The landlord logged a works order to investigate a noise from the pipework also on 6 October 2022. This was attended to on 27 October 2022, but no issue was found. This was attended to within a reasonable timescale in line with the landlord’s repairs policy.
The landlord raised a works order to repair the guttering on 6 October 2022 which was reported in one of the landlord’s repair records as complete on 21 October 2022. However, in the landlord’s contact records of 23 April 2023, the landlord stated that the guttering repair was booked in October 2022, rebooked for 27 January 2023 and that it had been booked in again on 20 April 2023. The timescale to complete the work was therefore unreasonable and outside of the repair policy timescales.
There were similar issues with progressing a repair to address an issue with the water pressure from the kitchen tap. The resident reported to the landlord that this was outstanding in his email of 20 December 2022. The landlord did chase this up with its contractor but there is no record that it did this until 10 January 2023. Its contractor then stated that the landlord needed to reraise the works order. The landlord updated the resident, but this was not until 3 February 2023. There was unreasonable delay in providing an update. It was clear that this repair was still outstanding on 9 February 2023 as the contractor failed to attend the appointment.
As mentioned above, it was the landlord’s responsibility to ensure that it appropriately tracked and ensured satisfactory completion of the repairs within its policy timescales. This was especially important given the identified issues with its contractor. It failed to keep track of the repairs required and there were inappropriate long delays. The landlord’s communication was inadequate as it generally responded when the resident chased up, rather than being proactive in providing updates.
There was therefore maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs required during the tenancy. In line with the Remedies Guidance, as referred to above, compensation of £350 is appropriate in this case. This comprises £200 in respect of the delays in progressing the repairs and £150 in respect of the inconvenience, time and trouble for the resident caused by the landlord’s failings.

The associated complaint and the resident’s request for compensation

The resident submitted a formal complaint on 12 September 2022. There was evidence of record keeping issues as the landlord advised the resident when he contacted on the 15 September 2022 that it was unable to see that a complaint was opened. This meant that the resident had to confirm again on 15 September 2022 that he wished to raise a complaint. The landlord’s acknowledgement of 20 September 2022 gave a 10 working day response timescale. This was not in accordance with the landlord’s policy which states that its response is due within 10 working days from receipt of the complaint. This was therefore a service failing as the landlord should have responded within 10 working days from the resident’s original complaint on 12 September 2022.
The landlord’s stage one response was sent on 30 September 2022 which was a little over the 10 working days from the resident’s complaint submission. The delay was not excessive. The landlord did not give an indication as to when the repairs would be completed, which the resident had requested as a remedy to his complaint. The landlord therefore missed the opportunity to provide this information leading to uncertainty in when the repairs would actually be completed.
There was delay in the landlord escalating the resident’s complaint to stage 2 from 5 October 2022 until 11 October 2022. The landlord advised at this point that it would respond within 20 working days. This was a failing as this was not in accordance with the landlord’s complaints policy or the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (The Code). A complaint response at stage 2 should have been issued within 20 working days of the resident’s escalation of the complaint, not the time when the complaint was logged.
The Code is a statutory requirement for landlord’s to follow. It is published on our website and sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations of landlords’ complaint handling practices. A complaint response should at stage one should be sent within 10 working days of the complaint being made. A complaint response at stage 2 should be sent within 20 working days of a resident’s complaint escalation request. The landlord should therefore pay particular attention to the complaint stages when it conducts a self-assessment of its complaints policy. The Ombudsman’s revised Code is due to be published on 1 April 2024 and the landlord should refresh its self-assessment based upon the new Code. It should then ensure that it updates its policy so that it reflects the new Code.
The landlord extended the deadline for its stage 2 response by a further 10 working days on 7 November 2022 as it was waiting for further information to answer the resident’s queries. It had phoned the resident on 3 November 2022 to advise of the need for a possible extension to the deadline which was reasonable. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 18 November 2022. This had been delayed but was within the timescale provided to the resident on 7 November 2022 and was therefore reasonable.
The landlord considered learning opportunities arising from each stage of its complaints process, which was appropriate. It was to notify its contractor in respect of its relet standards and gave feedback to ensure that repairs are completed before allowing a resident to move in. This was reasonable and demonstrates that the landlord was considering improvements to its processes in respect of its void procedures to avoid the identified failings happening for other residents.
The landlord initially offered one week’s rent rebate at stage one of £109.35 and increased the compensation to £150 at stage 2 comprising £50 for the delays to complete repairs, £50 to acknowledge the stress and inconvenience caused, £25 in respect of the resident’s time and trouble spent pursuing the complaint and £25 for the delay in providing its stage 2 response.
There was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling. In line with the remedies guidance, as above, in this instance, an amount of £100 compensation is appropriate, in respect of the inconvenience caused to the resident for the landlord’s failure to appropriately log a complaint and respond at both complaint stages within its policy timescales.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning the lettings process including the viewing and sign-up process.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning the condition of the property when let, including outstanding repairs and the condition of the garden and overgrown trees.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning repairs required at the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Issue a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report, for example, the errors made in respect of the lettings process, its failure to ensure that the property met its relet standard, its failure to ensure that the repairs were completed within a reasonable timescale in line with its policy, and its complaint handling failures.
2. Pay the resident £100 compensation in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning the lettings process including the viewing and sign-up process.
3. Pay the resident £615.53 compensation in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning the condition of the property when let, including outstanding repairs and the condition of the garden and overgrown trees.
4. Pay the resident £350 compensation in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning repairs required at the property.
5. Pay the resident £100 in respect of the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to carry out an inspection of the trees outside the resident’s property. The landlord must then arrange any necessary works to reduce any overgrown branches, particularly those branches affecting the guttering and/or structural integrity of the building. The landlord should complete the necessary works within a further 4 weeks. It should provide evidence of completion to this Service within a further 2 weeks.
Within 12 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to undertake a senior management review of this case to identify learning opportunities and to help prevent failures reoccurring. The outcome of this review is to be reported to both the Ombudsman and the landlord’s governing body. The senior managers carrying out the review must have had no previous involvement with this case. The review is to address 3 specific issues of concern:
1. Its lettings processes and how it should take a more person-centred approach, ensuring that individual circumstances are taken into account.
2. Its record keeping. It should set out its intention and a timescale to undertake a self-assessment of its record keeping practice using the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (May 2023) available on our website.
3. Its contract management processes, especially in connection with the end of contract period.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord reviews its complaints policy once the Housing Ombudsman’s revised Code is published on 1 April 2024. It should undertake a self-assessment of its complaints policy (using our self-assessment toolkit available on our website) to inform its review. It should publish its revised policy within 12 weeks of the publication of the revised Code.