Habinteg Housing Association Limited (202012489)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202012489

Habinteg Housing Association Limited

22 August 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The resident’s request for the windows in the property to be renewed.
2. The associated complaint.

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a bungalow. The landlord states that it has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident, however, the resident has advised that she has a medical condition which affects her immune system.
The resident initially raised concerns about the heaters in her property with the landlord on 25 January 2021 and said she wished to raise a complaint. She said that the heaters were not adequately heating the property and was concerned about the impact this would have on her health in view of an upcoming operation. She also reported mould around the windows. Following contact from the resident, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 29 January 2021 asking it to respond to the resident’s complaint, noting that she wanted the windows and heating system in the property to be replaced. An inspection took place on 4 February 2021 to inspect the heating and the windows in the property. The evidence shows that the heating system was replaced in March 2021 and the resident has advised that this resolved this aspect of her complaint.
In June 2021, the landlord confirmed that following a stock condition survey carried out in 2018, the windows at the property had been identified for replacement which would take place in 2022, within the same financial year. The resident continued to pursue her concerns and remained dissatisfied that she had not been provided with a timeframe for the window replacement programme.
In response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord apologised for the delay in responding to the resident in line with its complaints procedure. It explained that it had not been aware of any issues related to the windows at the property prior to the resident’s complaint and confirmed that the window replacement had been arranged to take place within the current financial year (2021/2022). It did not uphold the complaint as it had not been made aware of any issues related to the windows prior to January 2021 and had since agreed to replace these. Following the resident’s request to escalate her complaint, the landlord advised in October 2021 that it would not escalate the resident’s complaint to stage two of its complaints process as it had agreed to replace the windows and the complaint was out of time for escalation.
The resident referred her complaint to this Service in April 2022 as she was dissatisfied that no work to the windows had been completed. She explained that the windows were letting cold air in and that the property was cold as a result. She remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s communication regarding the planned programme of works and said that the landlord had not provided a date for when the work to the windows would be carried out.
In June 2022, the resident was informed by the landlord that there had been a delay to the work schedule due to material supply shortages. Works to replace the windows at the resident’s property as well as several other properties would begin in July 2022. It apologised for its lack of communication regarding the works and its failure to provide regular updates.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The evidence shows that the resident wrote to the landlord in March 2021 and raised a separate complaint about repairs needed to walls and fences in the garden, guttering, a roof repair and repairs to her internal doors. As these are a separate issue to the complaint raised with the Service, this is not something that this Service can assess at this stage as the landlord needs to be provided with the opportunity to investigate and respond to these aspects. It is unclear from the evidence provided as to whether the complaint has exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. As such, the resident will need to contact the landlord to resolve these issues. If she remains dissatisfied following the landlord’s final response, she may then approach this Service for further investigation.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for the windows in the property to be renewed.

The landlord’s repairs policy confirms that the landlord is responsible for repairs needed to the structure and exterior of the building which would include the windows. The policy sets out the expected timescales for repairs; emergency repairs including those to severe leaks and security issues within the property should be attended to within 24 hours. Routine repairs should be completed within 20 days. Larger items and structural repair work such as replacement of doors, windows, kitchens and bathrooms would usually be included in a planned programme of works in any given financial year. The landlord is expected to communicate with the resident to explain when the next programme of works would take place and the expected timeframe in order to manage their expectations.
In this case, there is no evidence to suggest that the resident had raised any concern that the windows needed to be replaced directly with the landlord prior to the Ombudsman’s involvement in January 2021. As such, there were limited steps the landlord could have taken to resolve the issues prior to this time as it had not been made aware of the issues. Following receipt of the resident’s complaint the landlord advised that it had arranged an inspection of the windows as well as the heating system in the resident’s property on 4 February 2021. However, the repair records make no mention of the windows and it is unclear if they were assessed on this date. Following this there was no further communication regarding the windows until June 2021 when the landlord confirmed that the windows would be replaced as part of a planned programme of works. The delay was likely to have been inconvenient for the resident who had expressed concern about the impact of the draughty windows.
It is important to note that social landlords have limited resources and are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. It can be reasonable for landlords to replace items such as doors, windows, kitchens and bathrooms as part of a planned programme of works rather than on an ad-hoc basis unless the item in question was beyond economical repair and posed an immediate danger to the resident. It is not disputed that the windows at the resident’s property were in need of replacement and there is no independent, expert evidence to suggest that the resident had reported any significant repair issues which would warrant a full replacement before the planned programme date.
However, the resident had reported that she was worried about the temperature in the property and the impact this may have on her health due to her compromised immune system. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have assessed the windows individually to determine whether any remedial works could be undertaken to lessen the impact on the resident whilst awaiting the replacement. There is no evidence to confirm that it did so which is likely to have caused some inconvenience to the resident who was awaiting a resolution.
Furthermore the landlord has an obligation to follow the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (the HHSRS) which is concerned with avoiding or minimizing potential hazards. The landlord has a responsibility to keep a property free from category one hazards, including excess cold. Guidance for the HHSRS sets out that a healthy indoor temperature is around 21°C and that temperatures below 16°C, may pose serious health risks for the elderly and below 10°C carries a great risk of hypothermia, especially for the elderly. Therefore, given the resident raised concerns about cold, the landlord should have at least investigated whether the temperature in the property was adequate or not under the relevant regulations.
The landlord’s communication with the resident regarding the window replacement was poor. Whilst the evidence shows that it had confirmed that the works would be undertaken ‘this financial year’ and ‘in 2022’, there is no evidence to confirm that the resident was provided with an estimated completion date. The landlord may not have been able to provide an exact date for the work as this was dependent on the contractor undertaking the work and the availability of resources, but it could have done more to manage her expectations of when the work would take place. This is particularly important where a planned programme is taking the place of an accepted repair requirement (given repair policy timescales are usually much shorter).
Similarly, the landlord failed to provide regular updates to the resident following its complaint response in October 2021 and there is no evidence to suggest that a further update on the window replacement programme was provided until June 2022, approximately three months after the proposed completion date in March 2022. Whilst the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its failure to update residents on the progress of the works and any delays, compensation is warranted for the inconvenience caused and time and trouble spent by the resident in pursuing these works as a result of the landlord’s poor communication.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

The landlord’s complaints policy states that it has a two-stage formal complaints process. A first report of a repair issue or request for a service would not be considered as a complaint in the first instance. At stage one, the landlord should respond within ten working days. if the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, they can escalate the complaint to stage two within four weeks of receiving the stage one complaint response. At stage two, the landlord should respond within 20 working days. In some circumstances the landlord may decide not to escalate the complaint to stage two, it should clearly explain its decision to the resident. If, at any stage, there is likely to be a delay, the landlord is expected to contact the resident, explain the reason for the delay and provide an estimated response timescale.
The resident initially asked for a complaint to be raised on 25 January 2021. On 29 January 2021, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaints policy. The Ombudsman sent a follow-up email on 15 June 2021 as the resident had not received a response and asked it to respond formally by 22 June 2021. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 7 July 2021, which was approximately 100 working days outside of its policy timescales at stage one. Whilst the landlord apologised for the delay in responding formally to the resident’s complaint it has not offered any explanation for the delay or compensation for the inconvenience caused. In line with its policy, the landlord was entitled to treat the matter as a first request for a service rather than a complaint due to the fact that it had not been previously made aware of the issues, however, it failed to explain this to either the resident or the Ombudsman which amounts to a service failure.
Following contact from the resident, the Ombudsman initially asked the landlord to consider the resident’s complaint at stage two of its complaints procedure on 13 August 2021. A further email was sent on 26 October 2021 as the resident had not received a stage two complaint response. The landlord issued its complaint response on 29 October 2021, which was approximately 35 working days outside of its policy timescales and likely to have caused inconvenience to the resident who had been pursuing her concerns.
The landlord explained that it would not escalate the complaint to stage two as the complaint was escalated on 26 October 2021 which was not within four weeks of its stage one complaint response. This is in line with the landlord’s policy, however, the landlord failed to acknowledge that the complaint escalation was requested by the Ombudsman on 13 August 2021. Whilst this request was made approximately 6 days outside of the four-week requirement, the landlord was also made aware that the resident had not received its stage one complaint response on 4 August 2021. As such it was not appropriate for the landlord to refuse to escalate the complaint on this basis as the request to escalate was made within a reasonable timescale. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have acknowledged its complaint handling delays at this stage and offered redress to the resident for the inconvenience caused.
The landlord took reasonable steps to contact the resident on 27 October 2021 to confirm her reasons for escalation. Her main concern was that she had not been given a specific date for when the windows would be replaced and the landlord also refused to escalate the complaint as it had already committed to replace the windows by March 2022. The resident had previously been informed that the works would be completed ‘this financial year’ and ‘in 2022’ but had not been provided with any specific confirmation of when the works were due to be completed. Whilst it was reasonable that the landlord may not have had specific dates for the work to take place due to the nature of programmed works, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have provided a further explanation as to why it could not provide specific dates at this stage if this was the case in order to manage her expectations. In addition, the landlord said it had ‘committed to carry out works during the financial year ending 31 March 2021’ within its final response. This was a minor error but may have caused some confusion to the resident as it suggests that the work should have been completed the previous year.
In view of the service failures identified, the landlord should pay the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the communication delays and the time and trouble she had spent pursuing her complaint. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance as detailed above.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s request for the windows in the property to be renewed.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders that the following actions are taken within four weeks:
1. The landlord is to pay the resident £400, comprised of:
  1. £100 to recognise the distress caused by the landlord failing to investigate the reports of the cold property reportedly caused by the windows.
  2. £100 in recognition of the inconvenience of the delayed window works beyond the landlord’s estimated completion date.
  3. £100 to recognise the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s lack of a specific work timetable or regular updates during 2021 and 2022 about the status of the works.
  4. £100 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor complaint handling.
2. The landlord should write to the resident to provide an update on the window replacement programme and confirm the expected start date and timescale for completion if it has not already done so.

Recommendations

The landlord should address the resident’s complaint related to its handling of repairs needed to the walls and fences in the garden, the roof and internal doors in line with its complaints process if it has not already done so.
It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident and updates its records in relation to any vulnerabilities the resident has so that it can consider these when handling repairs in future.