Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Sanctuary Housing Association (202122108)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202122108

Sanctuary Housing Association

23 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 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 the resident’s fence repair and its communication about this.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
  2. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 19 July 2021 regarding the delays to her fence repair that was raised on 03 May 2021. On 19 July 2021 the landlord stated it would aim to issue a full written response within ten working days; it advised its response may be delayed, because of a backlog of cases due to COVID 19.  The resident chased up a response from the landlord on 04 August 2021, 09 August 2021 and 25 August 2021. She stated the delay had affected her anxiety and mental health condition. On 31 August 2021, the landlord apologised for the delay and it stated it would complete its investigation and provide a full response to the complaint as soon as possible.
  3. The landlord issued a stage one complaint response on 06 September 2021. It apologised for the delay to its communication and the poor level of service provided to the resident. It stated its inspection officer reported that certain fence posts and panels needed to be replaced, but the rest of the fencing did not require repair or replacement. It confirmed that the works had been completed on 10 August 2021. The landlord offered £300.00 compensation to the resident broken down as follows:
    1. £100.00 for the inconvenience caused and for the delays in arranging an appointment for the works to be completed.
    2. £150.00 for the complaint being raised and the time taken for a response to be offered.
    3. £50.00 for the delays in communication and having to chase updates of the concerns.
  4. The resident raised a stage two complaint to the landlord on 07 September 2021. She stated she had initially reported the fence repair in April 2020 and had been told repairs had been put on hold due to COVID 19 and did not feel £300 was sufficient for that delay.  The resident stated her fence panels had rotted and would not stand another winter. The resident stated she felt she had been discriminated against, due to her mental health condition, as a neighbour had received a fence replacement, whereas she had been told she could not have a new fence.
  5. The landlord issued a stage two complaint response on 05 October 2021. It apologised for its delay and attributed it to the fact that the area had been under tier four COVID restrictions at the time when the repair was requested, which had affected its routine repair timescales. It stated it had requested a new inspection of the resident’s fence to take place on 14 October 2021. The landlord retained its position regarding the £300 compensation offered to the resident.
  6. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she stated that she remained dissatisfied that the landlord had taken over 17 months to repair the fence and she felt she had been discriminated against, due to her mental health condition.

Assessment and findings

Policies and procedures

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord retains the responsibility to keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the premises including boundary walls and fences.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy states it should attend to emergency repairs within 24 hours, appointed repairs within 28 calendar days, and planned repairs within its programmed works scheme.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy states it may award payments of up to £400 in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience of a service failure as follows:
    1. £0 – £50 = low effort/low impact.
    2. £51 – £151 = high effort/low impact or low effort/high impact.
    3.  £151 – £400 = high effort, high impact.

 

Scope of investigation

  1. In her correspondence with the landlord and this Service, the resident has stated that the landlord has acted in a discriminatory way towards her, due to her mental health condition.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 39 (i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we will not investigate matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure. This Service cannot determine whether discrimination has taken place in a legal sense as this would be a legal matter which the courts would be best placed to decide. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and how the landlord responded to her concerns that she had been treated differently from other residents in the same situation.
  3. The resident has also referenced how the landlord’s failure to respond in a timely manner, has impacted her mental health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments about her health. However it is outside our remit to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more appropriately dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts or to the landlord’s liability insurer (if it has one). As above, this is in line with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s fence repair and its communication about this.

  1. The landlord’s records show that the resident made her initial request for service regarding the repairs to her fence on 3 May 2021. The evidence indicates that the delays to the repairs to the resident’s fence were because of a backlog of repairs, caused by the COVID lockdown restrictions in place at the time. During this period non-urgent repairs, which are repairs that do not pose an imminent health and safety risk, would have been put on hold as a result of government advice to avoid all non-essential contact between households. Once restrictions were eased there was inevitably a backlog of repairs, leading to further delays.  The landlord is not at fault for delays due to issues beyond its control such as delays caused by the effect of the pandemic. Therefore, it was appropriate for the landlord to inform the resident of the potential delays in its response to her complaint, and it was appropriate for the landlord to apologise for its delay and set new timescale expectations for the repair.
  2. The landlord awarded the resident £100 in recognition of the inconvenience caused and for the delay in arranging the appointment for the works to be completed, £150 to address the delays in complaint handling and its response times and £50 for its delays in communication and for the resident chasing up repairs – a total of £300 compensation. It was appropriate for the landlord to compensate the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by delays and poor communication regarding the repairs. The landlord’s compensation policy explains that it can offer £151-£400 in its highest category in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience of a service failure.
  3. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the amount of £300 compensation would provide adequate redress for the service failures identified and is in line with our Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website) as well as the landlord’s own compensation policy. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests awards of between £250-£700 where the Ombudsman has found considerable service failure or maladministration, but there may be no permanent impact on the complainant. Examples could include: a complainant repeatedly having to chase responses and seek correction of mistakes, necessitating unreasonable level of involvement by that complainant, and failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy. For example, to address repairs; to respond to antisocial behaviour; to make adequate adjustments; and repeated failure to meaningfully engage with the substance of the complaint, or failing to address all relevant aspects of a complaint, leading to considerable delay in resolving a complaint.
  4. The resident stated that she reported her fence repair to the landlord by phone in April 2020. The landlord disputes this as it says its records show the repair was first reported in May 2021. This Service is not disputing what the resident has reported. However, as the landlord has given a different version of events and there is no record of the phone call, the Ombudsman cannot determine whether or not it took place. The landlord is expected to keep robust records of its communications and repair records with its residents. In this case, there is no evidence of inadequate record keeping by the landlord, as it has provided records of other, unrelated repairs reported by the resident around the same time as the reported phone call in April 2020.
  5. The Ombudsman understands the resident believes the fence should be replaced as she considers that a repair will not be sufficient. It is reasonable for the landlord to rely on the advice of appropriately qualified contractors when making a determination on what repairs are required. The landlord explained in its stage two response that as no further repairs had been reported as necessary by its contractor, it believed the fence repair to be adequate. However, it was appropriate for the landlord to request a new inspection of the fence after the resident raised further concerns about it. In accordance with its repair policy, the landlord is entitled to attempt to repair the fence in the first instance and would only be required to replace the fence if it was beyond economic repair. Therefore, it was appropriate for the landlord to repair parts of the fence and replace the panels it deemed necessary. In correspondence to this Service, the resident stated the appointment to receive the new panels on 05 November 2021 was cancelled. It is recommended that the landlord carries out any outstanding repairs to the resident’s fencing, if it has not done so already.
  6. The resident questioned why her neighbour had received a fence replacement in a short space of time whereas she had to wait a long time for a repair rather than replacement. She stated she felt discriminated against, due to her mental health condition. The landlord’s internal records show that it investigated the resident’s complaints of discrimination and responded to her concerns regarding this. The landlord stated it could not comment on why the neighbour’s fence was replaced due to data protection. The landlord’s response was reasonable, as it would not be expected to disclose the personal details of the resident’s neighbour, due to confidentiality reasons. It was appropriate for the landlord to conduct an investigation regarding the reports of discrimination and give a clear explanation of its position. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s concerns that her neighbour has been treated differently from her. However, for the same reasons as the landlord, the Ombudsman would be unable to share details of the reasons why the neighbour’s fence was replaced or the timescale for this with the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident in respect of how it handled repairs to the resident’s fence and its communication about this which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pays the resident the £300 compensation previously offered, if it has not done so already, as its offer recognised genuine elements of service failure and the Ombudsman’s finding of reasonable redress is based on this compensation being paid.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord carries out any outstanding repairs to the resident’s fencing, if it has not done so already.