Your Housing Group Limited (202419938)

Decision
Case ID	202419938
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Your Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	26 January 2026

Background

On 22 March 2023 the resident raised concerns about the flooring in their kitchen being uneven. Following this they disagreed with how the landlord proposed to complete the repair.

What the complaint is about

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen flooring.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaints handling.

Our decision (determination)

There was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen flooring.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen flooring

The landlord did not fully explain its decision to not remove the old flooring, and to instead lay new flooring material on top of the existing material. Additionally, the landlord has yet to respond to the resident’s concerns that the uneven flooring has damaged their kitchen appliances.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord provided three complaint responses even though it operates a 2-step complaint procedure. Additionally, one of the landlord’s complaint responses was significantly delayed.

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 £600 made up as follows: The £500 previously offered during the landlord’s internal complaint procedure. £100 to address the failures identified in its handling of the resident’s complaint. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 23 February 2026
2	Inspection order The landlord must arrange for a suitable independent professional to inspect the kitchen flooring to identify if it is uneven. Following this inspection the landlord is to outline its findings to the resident. This must include any planned works, and the rationale behind its decision making.	No later than 09 March 2026
3	Formal response order The landlord must formally respond to the resident’s reports of damage to their appliances or refer the matter to its insurers for consideration. The landlord is to provide a response in writing which includes actions it plans to take and its rationale for any decisions made.	No later than 23 March 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
9 August 2023	The resident complained to the landlord. They said: Flooring in the kitchen was uneven, and this had caused their kitchen appliances to be damaged. The landlord had been slow to address the repair, and this had led to them not having full use of their kitchen for 5 months. They did not agree with the landlord’s proposed method for repairing the floor. They wanted the old flooring to be fully removed, and a new floor laid. They were dissatisfied that the landlord had offered them 2 flooring samples to choose from. They wanted to be offered samples which were a range of colours, so they could select a material which matched their home décor.
31 August 2023	The landlord provided its stage one response. It said: It had arranged for the resident to be provided with additional flooring samples. It had booked an appointment for the old flooring tiles and grout to be removed and for new flooring to be laid on 12 October 2023. It apologised for the inconvenience and delays the resident had experienced. It offered compensation of £75 for the resident’s inconvenience, and £75 for the delays experienced.
29 January 2024	The resident escalated their complaint as they felt the flooring was in a poor state.
10 July 2024	The landlord provided an additional stage 1 response. It said: It outlined the progress of the repairs and delays that had occurred between October 2023 and July 2024. The delays included the resident being unsure about the supplied samples, employee absence, disagreement about the scope of works and concerns about damp and mould under the flooring. The landlord said, in addition to the compensation offered on 31 August 2023, it would offer the following compensation: £25 for the inconvenience caused. £25 for the delays in carrying out the repairs. £100 for its service failure. £100 for its lack of communication. £100 for the resident’s time and trouble.
10 July 2024	The resident escalated their complaint as they felt the repairs conducted were making the flooring spongey and uneven. They wanted the landlord to remove the old flooring and install new flooring.
20 August 2024	The landlord sent its stage 2 response. It said: It apologised for the inconvenience the resident had experienced, and it committed to making improvements. It felt the compensation offered on 10 July 2024 was appropriate and fair.
24 September 2024	The resident contacted us as they felt the flooring was uneven, and this had damaged their kitchen appliances. They said they wanted the landlord to re-consider its compensation and to remove the sub flooring installed and install new flooring.

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.

Scope of investigation

The resident told us they are dissatisfied with the landlord’s contractors as they had damaged radiators and door frames while completing repairs. These concerns were addressed in separate complaints. We have already issued determinations on those complaints, so the reported damage will not be considered in this investigation.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen flooring.
Finding	Service failure

The landlord’s repairs policy says it will aim to complete repairs within 28 days. However, there may be occasions where this is not possible, for example if repairs are large, complex or if a specialist contractor is required.
In a complaint dated 21 August 2023, the resident said the flooring issues had been ongoing for 5 months and had affected their use of the kitchen. They felt the landlord’s proposed repairs were a quick fix rather than a full repair. The resident asked the landlord to offer a wider range of flooring samples in different colours, as the materials previously proposed did not match their kitchen décor.
The landlord booked the repair for 11 October 2023 and told the resident it would source additional flooring samples for them to consider. The resident received the samples on 2 October 2023. On 10 October 2023, the resident said they were unsure which material they wanted. The resident has told us that the samples offered by the landlord were for industrial premises rather than for domestic flooring. As a material had not been agreed upon, the works scheduled for 11 October 2023 were rescheduled for 15 December 2023. This showed good customer service, as the landlord demonstrated flexibility in trying to meet the resident’s wishes when it was not required to do so. In our view, this was reasonable in the circumstances.
The landlord’s records showed that from 11 December 2023 it attempted to contact the resident on several occasions to rearrange the repairs due to employee absence. It was unable to make contact until 22 January 2024, when it rebooked the appointment for 31 January 2024.
On 31 January 2024, the resident refused the works because they disagreed with how the landlord proposed to complete the repair. The landlord had arranged for patch repairs, but the resident wanted the current flooring removed and new flooring laid. The landlord said it would keep the repair open in case the resident changed their mind.
In its stage one response dated 31 August 2023, the landlord had previously said the old tiles would be removed and new flooring laid. Therefore, it was reasonable for the resident to expect the old flooring to be removed or for an explanation as to why it no longer considered this work to be needed. It was a failing that the landlord did not address why its position had changed. To address this, we have ordered the landlord to inspect the flooring to assess whether it is uneven and then formally respond to the resident’s concerns about any damage to their appliances.
On 4 March 2024, the landlord agreed to meet the resident to discuss the works. This was reasonable given the disagreement and the length of time the repair had been ongoing. During the meeting, additional flooring samples were discussed, and the resident said they were unhappy with the samples provided. On 14 May 2025, contractors attended the property to carry out the works. Again, the resident disagreed with the proposed works and asked the contractors to leave.
Following this, additional delays occurred because the resident thought there might be mould underneath the previously installed tiles. The landlord arranged a damp and mould inspection, and no mould was identified during the inspection.
On 4 July 2024, repairs began, and the landlord carried out patch repairs before laying new flooring. The resident said they were not satisfied with the quality of the works. As a result, a post-inspection took place on 8 July 2024, during which the landlord identified the need for additional re-sealing works. The resident later refused these works.
When the resident brought their complaint to us, they said the flooring was still uneven and this affected their appliances. The resident had also raised the concern about their appliances in their original complaint. However, the landlord did not address this issue in any of its complaint responses or direct the resident to its relevant insurers. Therefore, we have made a finding of service failure.
In its complaint responses, the landlord apologised for the delays and inconvenience the resident had experienced. It also offered the resident £425 in compensation to address their distress and inconvenience, the time taken to complete the repair, and its service failures. Whilst we have made a finding of service failure in this case, we consider this amount appropriate and have not ordered the landlord to pay any additional compensation.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s complaints policy outlined a 2-step procedure. When a resident complained, it would acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days and issue a stage 1 response within 10 working days of that acknowledgement. If the resident requested escalation to stage 2, the landlord would acknowledge the request within 5 working days and provide its stage 2 response within 20 working days of that acknowledgement.
The resident complained on 9 August 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint 9 working days later, which exceeded its policy timescales. It then issued its stage 1 response within the required timescale, which mitigated its delay in acknowledging the complaint.
On 24 January 2024 the resident asked the landlord to escalate their complaint. The landlord’s policy at the time said residents had 8 weeks to request a stage 2 escalation. Instead of acknowledging the request or explaining that the escalation period had passed, the landlord treated the resident’s correspondence as a new complaint. This approach was likely to have caused confusion for the resident, which could have been avoided if the landlord had explained the situation and asked whether the resident wished for the matter to be handled as a new complaint.
The landlord issued a second stage 1 response on 10 July 2024, which was 118 days after the resident requested escalation. This was a significant delay.
The resident asked for their complaint to be escalated on 10 July 2024. The landlord acknowledged this 8 working days later and provided its stage 2 response 23 working days after the acknowledgement. This was slightly outside its policy timescales
The complaint handling in this case was poor. The complaint went through 3 stages when the landlord’s policy outlined a 2 stage process. The additional steps would likely have caused the resident confusion. There was also a significant delay between January and July 2024 in the landlord’s complaints handling. This impacted its ability to resolve the issues within a reasonable period.
The landlord told us it has recently made improvements in its complaint handling. This is positive, but it does not negate the inconvenience the resident experienced. As such, we consider maladministration occurred, and we have ordered the landlord to pay compensation of £100 to recognise the inconvenience caused.

Learning

The resident’s complaint has highlighted poor record keeping in how the landlord monitors complaints, and how information between its complaints and repairs teams are shared. The landlord should consider if the resident’s complaint has highlighted any areas in which it can make improvements going forward.
Additionally, the complaint has highlighted areas where the landlord’s communication could be improved. The landlord should consider the importance of fully explaining its rationale for repairs. Particularly when there is disagreement over the proposed repairs, and when it changes its plans on how it will complete a repair.