Tower Hamlets Homes (202209156)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202209156

Tower Hamlets Homes

12  January 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:
   1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen patio doors.
   2. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the front and back windows.

Background

2. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
3. In October 2021, the resident reported that her patio doors were in need of repair due to rotten timber. She also reported repairs to her window on the second floor, as it was rotten and could not be opened. The landlord attended on 16 November 2021 and concluded that the doors needed replacing. The landlord attended the property again on 4 March 2022 to survey the doors. It reported that it could not gain access to the property and so closed the repair.
4. The resident raised a complaint on 23 March 2022. She was unhappy with the delays to her repairs and that the landlord had closed the repair, without communicating that it had done so. She stated that she had not been informed of the repair appointment.
5. It is not clear from the evidence when the landlord first attended to the repairs for the windows. It ordered a new window for the front of the property in April 2022.
6. The landlord responded to the complaint on 5 April 2022. It apologised for not informing the resident about the repair appointment in March. It rebooked the appointment and stated that it would ensure that in future, its contractors would book such appointments with residents directly. It apologised for the delays to the resident’s repairs and offered £60 compensation for the inconvenience. The landlord replaced the doors on 4 May 2022.
7. The resident reported further issues with the door over a number of days in May 2022. Firstly stating that the door would not close properly, subsequently reporting that after the landlord attended to fix this issue, it had left exposed screws in the doorframe. Finally the resident reported that the doors would not lock from the outside. These issues were all repaired in May 2022. The resident followed up on the repairs to the property’s rear window in May 2022. She discovered that there had been an error, and the landlord had inspected and ordered the incorrect window. She escalated her complaint on 20 May 2022, complaining of the lack of communication from the landlord about her repairs. She also complained about the delay in getting the issues resolved and her dissatisfaction that the landlord was replacing a different window to the one she had reported had an issue.
8. The landlord has stated that it attended the property on 27 May 2022 and concluded that the majority of the windows could be repaired rather than replaced. It attended again on 6 June 2022 to measure the windows that would require replacing. The landlord responded on 21 June 2022. It detailed the steps it had taken to resolve the resident’s repair issues, but acknowledged that there had been a delay. It raised its compensation offer to £150, to reflect the inconvenience suffered by the resident.
9. The resident has stated to this Service that the works to her window have still not been completed. As an outcome, the resident would like all outstanding works to be finished.

Assessment

Policies

10. The landlord’s tenancy handbook states that the structure and exterior of the resident’s property is the landlord’s responsibility to keep in repair. It also states that it will aim to complete routine repairs within 20 working days. Normal routine repairs are defined as ‘those which may cause inconvenience but are not of an urgent nature and do not pose an immediate risk to a resident’s health and safety’. The handbook states that certain works which require items to be manufactured like doors and windows may take longer to complete and other factors like the requirement to erect scaffolding can add unavoidable delay. Residents will be informed if this is the case.
11. Where a pre-inspection is required, the tenancy handbook also states that an appointment will be agreed with the resident when the repair is reported. On the first occasion a resident misses an appointment, it will be rearranged. If missed on a second occasion, the repair request will be cancelled.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen patio doors.

12. The landlord has stated that the delays to repairs for the kitchen doors occurred due to a back- log in repairs following the Covid-19 pandemic. Whilst factors such as the pandemic are outside of the landlord’s control, general good customer service would dictate that the landlord should keep the resident updated on her repairs. In this case, the landlord’s communication was lacking, as it failed to manage her expectations effectively. It also did not inform the resident of the date of her repair appointment, and subsequently cancelled her repairs when she was out [due to not being able to gain access], without informing her that it had done so. This is in contravention of its repairs policy stated above, and is a failing.
13. The landlord employs both a contractor and a sub-contractor for its repairs. Both attended the property to ascertain if the doors needed replacing. With the contractors attending in November 2021 and the sub-contractors in January 2022. The landlord is entitled to choose how to structure its repair team, however, the multiple visits to decide whether to replace the doors made the process more protracted and added to the delay.
14. There were several errors in its handling of the work to the doors. Once the doors were fitted in May 2022, the resident experienced three separate issues with the doors, meaning that the landlord had to re-attend the property on three further occasions to rectify its mistakes. Mistakes do occur, and the landlord attended within the stipulated timescales above to make the issues right. However, the number of errors in completing this repair were unreasonable and indicate that the resident did not receive good service in this regard, constituting a failing.
15. In the landlord’s first complaint response, it acted appropriately by acknowledging that the repairs to the door had been delayed. It apologised that it had not informed the resident of the inspection appointment, and for cancelling it without letting her know. It explained that it would now instruct its contractors to make appointments directly with residents to ensure that this error would not happen again. The landlord also offered £60 compensation, in recognition of the delays to the resident’s repairs. This response was appropriate at the time and addressed the issues up to that point effectively.
16. The landlord’s final response assessed the subsequent issues that occurred after the doors were replaced, and increased its offer of compensation to £150. Despite listing its errors it did not provide adequate reasoning why they had occurred. It also did not explain what steps it would take to put things right, other than stating that it had rectified each of the issues. It is unclear if this is the case, as the resident has disputed that the repairs were completed by this point, and there are insufficient repair records to know for certain what had been addressed at this stage. Overall, the final response did not adequately address the resident’s complaint.
17. Although the landlord revised its compensation offer, this amount was insufficient to address the continuing errors with the doors and the issues with windows (assessed below). This is due to the landlord failing to apologise for its errors and neglecting to take to steps to ensure it learnt from mistakes, as advised in the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the front and back windows.

18. The window repairs were raised in October 2021. Due to a lack of clear repair records, it is not clear when the landlord first attended to address these repairs. From the resident’s communication it is apparent that the landlord had repaired the rear window twice before May 2022.  It attended in June 2022 to inspect the windows again. Following the stage 2 response the repair remained outstanding and the landlord raised scaffolding at the front of the property in August 2022 and replaced the front window, but not the rear window which the resident had specifically reported. This repair was still outstanding when the resident brought her complaint to this Service in October 2022 and the landlord advised that the works would be undertaken on 3 November 2022. The Ombudsman has considered these facts as they are intrinsically linked to the complaint.
19. In total, the full repairs to the resident’s windows will have taken over a year to complete. Although the landlord’s repairs policy states that window repairs which require scaffolding may take longer than normal repairs, this delay is not of a reasonable length and the communication around the matter has not alleviated the inconvenience caused.
20. Whilst the landlord has explained that the delays were due to a backlog caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, it has also noted that its contractor and sub-contractor disagreed about the extent of the repairs required for the resident’s windows, which made the repairs more protracted. The landlord was entitled to rely on the advice of its contractors and undertake repairs that were more cost effective. However, the delay to the window repairs were excessive, and disorganised, with multiple visits to assess the same issue being evident and conflicting opinions. The landlord also mistakenly replaced the resident’s front window, rather than the rear window that she had reported. While delays due to the pandemic are beyond the landlord’s control, the landlord’s handling of the repairs was disjointed and added to the delays. This was a failing.
21. There was also a lack of appropriate communication from the landlord in regard to the resident’s repairs. Again, in line with good customer service, the landlord should have updated the resident on any material changes or delays to her repairs. The evidence shows that the resident was constantly having to chase the landlord for updates and information. This is not appropriate and is a failing in the circumstances.
22. The landlord’s complaint response in regard to the window repairs was not appropriate. It also did not appropriately acknowledge that it had made an error in raising a window replacement for the wrong window. Although it explained that it was waiting for quotes from contractors, it did not explain why the delays had occurred. Again, although the landlord offered a total of £150 for the inconvenience it had caused in regard to both the window and patio door repairs, this was insufficient for the delays, failings in repairs and communication and ultimately the distress and inconvenience caused. Because of this, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord did not offer suitable redress within its complaint response.

Determination (decision)

23. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen patio doors.
24. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the front and back windows.

Orders

25. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £250 in acknowledgement of the inconvenience caused by its poor handling of the repairs to the kitchen patio doors.
    2. Pay the resident £250 in acknowledgement of the inconvenience caused by its poor handling of the repairs to the front and back windows.
    3. Ensure that any outstanding works are completed, if not already complete.
26. The compensation amount is inclusive of the £150 offered by the landlord.
27. The landlord should update this Service on its compliance with these orders.

Recommendations

28. The landlord should bring its complaint’s policy (in relation to its complaint response times), up to date with the Housing Ombudsman’s complaint handling code.