Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (202412297)

Decision
Case ID	202412297
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council
Landlord type	Local Authority
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	30 April 2026

Background

1. The resident has mental health and mobility issues, which the landlord is aware of. It commenced improvement works to the resident’s property in November 2023, under an energy efficiency scheme. The resident reported delays, snagging issues, and damage to the property and his belongings. He raised 2 complaints about the issues on 15 January and 19 April 2024, and he escalated the second complaint.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Handling of improvement works and associated issues.
   2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of improvement works and associated issues.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Improvement works

4. The landlord explained the reason for its initial delays, repaired or replaced damaged property, and followed up on the snagging issues. It offered reasonable compensation for the resident’s distress and inconvenience.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord issued its stage 1 response almost 5 weeks outside its policy timescales and did not keep the resident informed. It apologised for the delay however did not explain its reasons or recognise the impact on the resident.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £50 in compensation for its complaint handling failures. It must pay this directly to the resident and provide documentary evidence of this by the due date.	No later than 28 May 2026

 

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord should pay the resident the £350 offered in its stage 2 response if it has not done this already. The finding of reasonable redress is based on it doing so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
October 2023 to January 2024	The landlord inspected the property and commenced works to replace the windows and install insulation to the roof and external walls.
January to April 2024	The resident reported a range of issues to the landlord, including delays completing the works, and damage to the property and his belongings. He raised the first of 2 complaints during this time. The landlord completed the main works and replaced his damaged belongings. Its contractor issued him with a £25 decorating voucher. The landlord then offered £300 in compensation.
19 April 2024	The resident raised a new complaint to say snagging works were still outstanding and the landlord had not responded to further reports he had made, regarding damage to the patio and issues with operatives.
28 June 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It said the patio was not damaged but its contractor would contact him about any other outstanding works. The landlord repeated its compensation, along with an additional £50 for problems with the operatives. The resident escalated his complaint the same day as he said the compensation was too low, and he disputed the landlord’s findings over the patio.
4 July 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response, in which it reiterated its position at stage 1.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred his complaint to us as he remained unhappy with the level of compensation and the landlord’s findings regarding the patio. He said he wanted it to increase its compensation and repave the patio.

 

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	Improvement works
Finding	Reasonable redress

 

What we have not investigated

6. The resident told both the landlord and us that the stress of the situation had made him unwell, and he asked the landlord whether any of its compensation was in recognition of this. If the resident believes the landlord’s actions or inaction have affected his health it would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. It is best for the courts to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice. We have therefore not investigated this further.

What we have investigated

7. The landlord wrote to the resident on 1 November 2023 to confirm it would start the improvement works that month. It completed the bulk of the works and removed the scaffolding by 16 January 2024. This was within the 60 working day timescales in its repairs policy for works of this nature. The resident complained on 15 January 2024 to say it had delayed the works without updating him. He also said the scaffolding had damaged his patio, and operatives had broken personal items such as his garden storage unit.
8. The landlord’s records do not show when it originally planned to complete the works or whether there were any unexpected delays. Therefore, it is not possible to assess the reasonableness of its actions prior to January 2024. However, in its stage 1 response of 29 January, the landlord acknowledged communication issues at the start of the works, and apologised. It also said it would inspect the patio and replace damaged items. It was appropriate to take responsibility for the damages and set out what it would do next, as this recognised the key points from the resident’s complaint.
9. The landlord completed snagging works between February and April 2024, including repairs to ceiling cracks which appeared during the insulation work to the roof. It ordered a new storage unit and its contractor issued a £25 voucher as thanks for the resident’s patience. It also visited him at home to offer £300 for inconvenience and decorating costs. The landlord inspected the patio and declined to conduct any repairs as it said the scaffolding had not caused any damage.
10. The resident raised his second complaint on 19 April 2024. He said the overall works had taken too long, which had affected his stress levels and mental health. He also disputed the landlord’s findings over the patio, as he said it had flooded during heavy rain which had never happened before. The resident added further issues including that operatives had damaged his fence and used his property to access the house next door, leaving doors open in the cold which affected his mobility issues. He said the compensation was not enough to cover his inconvenience and redecorating costs.
11. The landlord issued its second stage 1 response on 28 June 2024. It said its earlier compensation was fair, but it increased this by £50 for the issues the resident reported with the operatives. This brought its total compensation to £350. The landlord explained its contractor would be in touch about the fence repairs, but it said the patio had flooded due to drainage issues during the works, rather than scaffolding damage, which it had since rectified. The landlord apologised again for the initial delays and explained these were due to unforeseen complications in December 2024.
12. The resident escalated his complaint the same day as he was unhappy with the landlord’s findings. It issued its stage 2 response on 4 July 2024, to repeat its apologies and its position at stage 1. It said it would improve its repairs monitoring and arrange training for operatives on conduct and customer relations. In the meantime, it repaired the fence on 1 July.
13. The landlord’s response regarding the patio was reasonable, as the evidence shows it inspected this fully and held detailed discussions with its contractor. It appropriately completed follow-up repairs, replaced damaged items, and it explained the reason for the original delays which it had not done in its earlier responses. The landlord’s compensation was in the upper scales of its compensation policy and our guidance, for failings which have inconvenienced and impacted a resident but had no permanent impact. It was also apologetic and transparent about the areas where it needed to improve. Together, these remedies were reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

 

14. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and respond at stage 1 within a further 10 working days. If the landlord needs more time, it will notify the resident and any extension should not exceed 10 additional working days. This aligns with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
15. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 28 June 2024. This was almost 5 weeks outside the timescales in its policy and the Code, and there is no evidence it notified him of an extension. By this point the resident had contacted the landlord 3 times to repeat his complaint, and he said the lack of communication was causing him significant frustration. Although the landlord apologised for the delay, this was brief and it did not explain its reasons or acknowledge how the delay had affected the resident.
16. The landlord issued its stage 2 response within 20 working days, in line with its policy and the Code. However, its delay at stage 1 impacted on the resident and we have ordered it to pay £50 in recognition of this, in line with our compensation guidance for a failing of this scale and nature.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

17. The landlord’s records at the start of the works were unclear, however it identified the need to improve how it tracked repairs based on the resident’s experience. This shows learning from the complaint, and the landlord may wish to review its current record keeping practices to ensure it can remain focussed on this.

Communication

18. The landlord also acknowledged issues with its communication regarding the works and said it would improve this alongside its record keeping. This shows it recognised the importance of keeping residents informed. The landlord would also benefit from applying this to its complaint handling if it has not done so already, to ensure it keeps residents up to date about any extensions or other delays.