Sanctuary Housing Association (202121220)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202121220

Sanctuary Housing Association

25 May 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning the repairs and security of the communal bin store.
    2. The associated complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared leaseholder of the property, and the landlord is the freeholder. The property is a flat within a block of flats.
  2. In early August 2021 the resident raised concerns to the landlord regarding the communal bin store. He said it had been without locks for over a year which allowed access to intruders who displayed antisocial behaviour (ASB), including drug use and sleeping in the bin store. The resident said that despite assurance from the landlord that it would handle the situation, nothing had been done. The resident raised a formal complaint on 17 September 2021 and highlighted similar issues regarding the bin store as in his report in August 2021. He said it had become “a no-go-area” for residents and he believed there was a risk of fire to the block due to “regular smoking in the bin store”. The resident suggested that the landlord fix the locks or replace the bin store door, and asked that an investigation be carried out regarding the length of time taken to resolve the issue.
  3. In response to the resident’s report in August the landlord explained that it would have a contractor change the lock and fit a metal plate to cover gaps to prevent the lock being broken again. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s formal complaint in late September. It informed him that a job had been raised with a specialist contractor who was awaiting materials from suppliers. It advised that it had chased them and that it would notify him once the contractor confirmed a completion date. Correspondence between the landlord and its staff showed that the contractor suggested making the lock more secure given the location of the bin store (facing the main road).
  4. The resident raised concerns about the length of time taken to resolve his complaint. He explained that the landlord had advised it would contact him within 20 working days to discuss his concerns in more detail and the action it could take to resolve the situation. However, he noted that he had only received emails advising that the contractors were awaiting materials. The resident said paper and waste had been strewn all over the bin store area, which he believed was a fire risk. He said the situation had worsened and non-residents were displaying ASB, including drug use and harassment of the residents that entered the bin store. 
  5. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 20 October 2021. It confirmed that an order was raised with a contractor, who confirmed receipt and were awaiting materials. It explained that it had chased the contractor several times and had requested that they prioritise the works once materials were received. The landlord offered the resident a £100 gesture of good will as an apology for the time trouble and inconvenience caused.
  6. The resident declined the landlord’s offer and noted that other residents were also affected by its failure to resolve the bin store locks. He asked for his complaint to be escalated and reiterated that he had not received contact from the landlord, other than notice it was awaiting materials. The resident explained that he was dissatisfied with the: absence of a definite deadline for work completion, non-residents continued use of the bin store, lack of investigation into why it took the landlord so long to resolve the issue and a lack of explanation provided for failing to listen to residents’ complaints. He asked that the landlord: fix the bin store issues and secure the door to prevent intruders breaking in, exclude repair costs from the service charges, investigate why the landlord failed to resolve the matter for over a year, inform residents of the outcome of the investigation, apologise and demonstrate its commitment that it would not be repeated again.
  7. The landlord issued its final complaint response on 24 November 2021 and apologised for the length of time taken to resolve the issues. It said that repairs to the bin store lock were previously made in 2021, but as forced entry continued, a decision was made to replace the bin store door instead. It advised that a contractor had been approved to replace the door on 18 November, an order was raised on 24 November 2021 and placed with a manufacturer the same day. The landlord explained that it was unable to provide an installation date because the door required manufacturing, it gave an estimated lead time of four to six weeks, and advised that it would update the resident accordingly. The landlord noted that the police were also aware of the unauthorised persons; who would be “asked to move on” when present. It said it was confident that the new door installation would prevent further break-ins and unauthorised persons entering the premises. The landlord concluded that while the main repair to the lock was completed in a timely manner, due to the supply of materials and non-attendance of contractors, delays did occur. It recalled its correspondence with the contractors from 3 August to 26 October 2021. The landlord said it was satisfied that communication with the resident was responded to within its contact guidelines. It advised that for data protection purposes, it was unable to discuss communication between other residents and would not notify others of the outcome of the investigation into the resident’s concerns. It apologised again for the time and inconvenience caused and upheld its previous offer of £100. Additionally, it offered £25.00 for delays, £25 for its error in sending the quotation to the incorrect department, £25.00 for unclear records and £25 in recognition of the late final complaint response.
  8. The resident passed his complaint to this Service as he was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, he raised similar issues as in his report in September 2021 and disputed that the landlord had resolved the issues.

Assessment and findings

Policies and Procedures

  1. The landlord’s homeowner’s handbook states that it is responsible for keeping the structure and outside of the resident’s home and block in a good state of repair. This includes rubbish chutes, bins and other facilities for storing rubbish.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy advises that appointed repairs apply to all non-emergency repairs, which it aims to complete within 28 days.
  3. The landlord has a two-stage complaint procedure, at stage one, the landlord aims to respond within ten working days and the final complaint response should be within 20 working days.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports concerning the repairs and security of the communal bin store

  1. In accordance with the landlord’s homeowner’s handbook, the landlord is responsible for keeping its facilities for storing rubbish (bin store) in good repair. It was therefore necessary for the landlord to investigate the resident’s reports of damage to the bin store lock and to take appropriate action to resolve any issues it identified. The resident raised concern about the bin store lock in August, and in September 2021 he raised a formal complaint regarding the repairs required and the safety of the communal bin store. The landlord’s repairs history showed that it arranged for a contractor to attend and resolve the issues in August 2021, however this went unattended. The repairs history further showed that the landlord chased for completion of works between August and October 2021, in which it was advised that the contractor was awaiting materials. The lock was replaced on 27 October 2021.
  2. In accordance with the landlord’s repair policy all appointed repairs should be completed within 28 days. The landlord failed to provide this service between August and October 2021 and the initial repair was overdue. The landlord did explain that it had to wait for materials which does mitigate some of the delay.
  3.  It is reasonable for landlords to attempt repairs instead of replacement where it is advised this is possible. It was outside the landlord’s control that a third party would break the new lock in October 2021. The landlord then took the appropriate decision to replace the entire door on the advice of its contractor.
  4. The repair policy states that despite best efforts to complete repairs on time, it is not always possible as some repairs require specialist parts to be ordered. The need for a specialist contractor and the manufacturing of the door required the landlord to adhere to the contractor’s schedule. It is understandable that there would be an impact on the service provided by the landlord, such as in this case, which it could not fully mitigate. The landlord recognised the impact the issues had on the resident and offered £125 (of its £200 offer) to acknowledge the inconvenience the longer repair would have caused.
  5.  Within their complaint about the door lock, the resident raised concerns about his safety due to the ASB displayed by non-residents accessing the communal bin store. Residents experiencing ASB are often understandably distressed and upset by the issues reported to the landlord. The Ombudsman’s role in such cases is to consider how the landlord has dealt with the reports, including whether it acted in line with its own policies and procedures and whether its actions were reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances. In its final complaint response, the landlord advised that police and council were aware of the unauthorised persons, and whenever present they would be asked to move on”. This was pragmatic, as the landlord would be limited in the actions it could take if the persons displaying ASB were not its residents. The landlord would also be unable to guarantee the reoccurrence of another break so its focus on prioritising replacing the door was appropriate, while it ensured the behaviour of non-residents was raised with the appropriate authorities.

Associated complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint procedure advises that when a complaint is made, wherever possible it will look to resolve it at the first point of contact by acknowledging the complaint, an advising what action would be taken to resolve the issue and when it would be completed. The resident said he was dissatisfied with the time taken to resolve his complaint. He said, aside from updates that the landlord was chasing the contractors, he had not received contact from it to discuss his concerns in more detail, or the actions it would take to resolve the situation. However, correspondence showed that it explained its actions taken to resolve the issues, and updated him regarding the estimated lead time. The landlord also kept the resident informed of the progress of the works and of the wait for materials. In the landlord’s stage one complaint response, it recognised the impact the issues had on the resident and offered compensation alongside the explanation. The landlord’s final complaint response was not within its advised complaint procedure of 20 days, it acknowledged this and offered £25 for the recognised failure. The landlord’s total offer of £200 was in line with its compensation guidance and in recognition of the time, trouble and inconvenience of the landlord’s service failures.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress in response to the communal bin store repair failures prior to the investigation which is considered satisfactory.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress in response to its complaint handling failures prior to the investigation which is considered satisfactory.