The Havebury Housing Partnership (202121189)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202121189

The Havebury Housing Partnership

16 June 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 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 outstanding repairs to windows in the resident’s property.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord at a semi-detached house. On 22 March, 13 April, 4 and 14 May, 12 July, 1 and 2 September, 27 October and 1 November 2021, the landlord’s records showed that the resident reported outstanding repairs to it for his property’s windows not opening properly and being draughty, for which it inspected and overhauled but declined to replace the windows.
  2. On 5 November 2021, the resident raised a stage one complaint regarding the “inadequate service” that he had received when he had reported to the landlord that his windows needed repairs. He explained that its contractors had arrived at his property without an appointment, including on that date, and that they were “rude and uninterested”, especially when he requested weekend appointments. The resident also stated that his windows were draughty and required brute force to open, and that not enough was being done by the landlord to resolve these issues, for which he requested a permanent solution from it on an agreed date.
  3. In its stage one complaint response to the resident on 18 November 2021, the landlord apologised to him for its contractors being inconsiderate, and stated that it would record and monitor its staff’s calls as part of staff training to improve its customer service. It also apologised that its contractors had arrived at his property without prior notice, and said that it had instructed them in future to set up appointments in advance. The landlord also explained that, following a recent inspection of the resident’s windows, these were found to be in good condition, but that one small lounge window needed easing. It further added that a surveyor would contact him to arrange to inspect the property, so that he could show them how much force was needed to open the windows.
  4. The resident disputed on 8 and 18 November 2021 that just one lounge window had outstanding repairs at his property but that the majority did, and he reported that the surveyor who had recently visited did not inspect all of the windows at his property. He contended that, if these were in good condition, they would not be sticking, and sought for this to be permanently resolved. The resident was also dissatisfied that one of the landlord’s contractors had cancelled an appointment on the same morning, due to this being a bank holiday, when he had taken the day off, and he was unhappy with how frequent their previous repair appointments were, as he had to take time off work to attend them.
  5. In its final stage complaint response to the resident on 14 December 2021, the landlord apologised to him that one of its contractors had cancelled their appointment at short notice, it and said that it would speak to the contractor involved. It also stated that there was some confusion as to which contractors were responsible for certain repairs, and it re-offered him the surveyor’s appointment to inspect all of his windows and the force needed to open them on 29 December 2021, if he required this. As redress, in light of the inconvenience caused to the resident, the landlord offered him £200 compensation.
  6. The landlord recorded that its subsequent surveyor’s inspection of all of the windows at the resident’s property on 29 December 2021 found these to be in good condition and to operate as required. It noted that some of the windows were initially difficult to open due to sticking from paint, which it said could be overcome by regularly opening the windows.
  7. The resident then complained to this Service that he did not seek compensation, but to get his windows repaired or replaced without delay. Although he believed that the compensation should have been higher due to the stress that he had experienced from having to take time off to attend the window appointments. The resident added that the landlord should not expect him to keep allowing contractors to arrive at his property and repeat the same repairs, and he wanted a guarantee that, after the window repairs were completed, no more works would be required to them in the future. He also regarded the inspection of 29 December 2021 as producing a report that was too brief.

Assessment and findings

  1. Under the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy, it is obliged to ensure that appointments for non-emergency repairs are booked at the resident’s convenience within 15 days, and it mostly complied with this timescale by repeatedly attending his reports about the outstanding repairs to his windows within this from 22 March to 29 December 2021. It is also required to provide an efficient and effective repairs and maintenance service.
  2. The resident was dissatisfied that he was unable to have weekend appointments for the outstanding repairs to his windows. Under the landlord’s responsive repairs procedure, however, weekend appointments are outside of its bandings for appointments that are only available on weekdays, and therefore it was reasonable for it to have only offered him appointments within its bandings.
  3. Nevertheless, the landlord does have a responsibility under its repairs and maintenance policy to provide a service that takes into account its customers’ needs. When the resident expressed concerns that its contractors were not considerate of the fact that he needed weekend appointments due to his work commitments, it took appropriate steps in its complaint responses. The landlord did so by apologising to him for this, and by learning from the outcome by recording and monitoring its staff’s calls to improve its customer service.
  4. Furthermore, in accordance with the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy, appointments are to be made at the resident’s convenience. However, it initially failed its obligation to do so, as he and it confirmed that its contractors had arrived at his property without prior notice on occasions from 22 March to 1 November 2021. The landlord did, however, demonstrate a willingness to put things right by instructing its contractors to set up future appointments with the resident in advance.
  5. In addition, the resident was dissatisfied that one of his appointments was cancelled by the contractor on the morning of the appointment due to a bank holiday. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to apologise to him for the missed appointment and to agree to speak to the contractor about this, as this would have caused inconvenience for him, who took time off work to attend the appointment. Moreover, it acknowledged that there were some delays in its response to the resident’s reports of outstanding window repairs from 22 March to 1 November 2021, due to it losing track of what contractors were responsible for certain repairs.
  6. Furthermore, the compensation of £200 offered by the landlord to the resident in its final stage complaint response was proportionate to put things right in respect of its above missed appointments and delays. This is because the amount was in line with its compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which gave it discretion to recognise his distress and inconvenience from such failings with up to £250 compensation. The amount offered therefore reflected the contractors’ attendances without notice, the cancelled contractor’s appointment at short notice on the bank holiday, repairs being delayed as a result of being raised to the wrong contractors, and any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by this at the levels recommended by its policy and our guidance.
  7. The resident, as a resolution to his complaint, wanted the difficulty in opening the windows at his property to be resolved by these being either repaired or replaced, and he wanted a guarantee that no more responsive repairs to them would be needed in the future. Nevertheless, the landlord inspected and overhauled the windows from 22 March to 1 November 2021, after which it found these to be in good condition.
  8. The landlord’s subsequent window inspection report following its surveyor’s inspection on 29 December 2021, also stated that the windows were in good condition, and that the difficulty in opening them could be overcome by doing so regularly. In the absence of any other expert evidence to the contrary, it was reasonable for it to rely on the findings of its expert inspections, and it could not necessarily be expected to guarantee that no more responsive repairs to the windows would be required in the future, so that it was not obliged to take any further action for them at that time.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of outstanding repairs to windows in his property satisfactorily.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pay the resident the £200 compensation that it previously offered him, if it has not already done so.