Sanctuary Housing Association (202122653)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202122653

Sanctuary Housing Association

24 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs relating to her shed.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association.
  2. On 11 March 2021 the resident reported that the roof of her shed had blown off due to high winds. The landlord subsequently advised the resident that it considered the shed to be a ‘gifted item’ and therefore it was not its responsibility to carry out repairs.
  3. On 16 March 2021 the resident raised a formal complaint as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s position. She also requested that repairs to be undertaken on the shed. The resident informed the landlord that an independent contractor attended the property had advised her that the screws used for the construction of the shed were defective because they were too short for the purpose of securing the roof.
  4. The landlord, following the resident’s complaint, contacted her directly to investigate the complaint. It subsequently provided its stage one response on 23 March 2021, and reiterated its position, namely that the shed was a ‘gifted item’ and therefore not its responsibility. The landlord further advised that if the shed was faulty or a risk to the resident’s safety, it could remove the shed on her behalf, but that a new replacement would not be provided. Around this time, the resident also reported her intention to move out of the property and the landlord offered its assistance with the application process.
  5. Following the resident’s request of an escalation of her complaint, the landlord provided its stage two response on 24 March 2022. It reiterated that it did not consider the shed to be its responsibility and provided an excerpt of the tenancy agreement which related to each party’s responsibilities. The landlord further noted that the resident moved into the property in 2016 and prior to this report, had not the resident raised any concerns about the shed. It therefore considered it reasonable to assume that at the time she had moved into the property (and the shed became a ‘gifted item’), the shed was fit for purpose. The landlord concluded by reiterating its offer to arrange for the removal of the shed so that the resident could purchase a replacement if she wished.
  6. The resident referred her complaint to this service as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to her request to carry out repairs to the shed.

Assessment and findings

Policies and procedures

  1. The tenancy agreement sets what the landlord is responsible for in terms of repairs. It specifies that the landlord shall maintain and where appropriate keep in proper working order the structure and outside of the property including the roof, outside walls, outside doors, window frames, windowsills, drains, gutters, external pipes and chimneys, but not including any garden fences, walls, gates or other boundary structures, driveways or paved areas.
  2. The tenancy agreement also states that the resident is responsible for keeping the garden fences, walls or any other boundary structures and any driveway and paved area in good repair and condition and to replace where necessary.

Shed repairs

  1. The shed is not explicitly mentioned in the tenancy agreement and it is unclear as to whether the shed would be considered a “boundary structure,” (in which case it would fall under the resident’s responsibilities. The Ombudsman notes that the tenancy agreement includes a schedule of ‘gifted items’, however, the shed is not listed here. While it would have been helpful and in line with best practice for the landlord to have explicitly stated at the beginning of the tenancy what it considered to be a ‘gifted item’, it is unclear whether the omission of its mention in the schedule in the tenancy agreement precludes it from nevertheless being a ‘gifted item’.
  2. The legal interpretation of contractual terms is beyond the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman, and such a determination is more appropriate for the courts. This is in accordance with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which concern 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. The Ombudsman notes that the resident is able to seek alternative legal remedies and may wish to consider legal advice in relation to these. However, the Ombudsman can still investigate whether the landlord responded fairly and appropriately to the resident’s concerns.
  3. After the resident’s formal complaint, the landlord appropriately contacted the resident directly to discuss her concerns as part of its investigation. In all its communications, the landlord clearly articulated its position that repairs to the shed were not its responsibility. The also landlord made appropriate use of its formal responses to highlight where in the tenancy agreement it considered the limits of its responsibilities to be.
  4. The landlord also appropriately offered to remove the shed at no cost to the resident should she wish to replace it. Additionally, the landlord appropriately offered its assistance to the resident when she reported her intention to move out of the property.
  5. In summary, the landlord acted fairly by investigating the matter promptly and the landlord’s communications were clear and reasonable in the circumstances.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s reports of repairs relating to her shed.

Recommendations

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord to contact the resident and include the following:
    1. reiterate its offer to remove the shed from the resident’s property;
    2. reiterate its offer of assistance to the resident regarding her application to move into another property if required.