Sanctuary Housing Association (202205743)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202205743

Sanctuary Housing Association

31 January 2023

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:
   1. Communication regarding appointments for a gas safety check, a stop tap leak and a damp and mould inspection.
   2. Handling of the associated complaint.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
3. The resident raised a complaint on 12 July 2022 as he had experienced difficulties rearranging an appointment for a damp and mould inspection. He was also dissatisfied that a contractor had tried to arrange the appointment without providing sufficient notice. On 28 August 2022, the resident raised additional concerns regarding letters from the landlord stating he had denied access for appointments for a gas safety inspection and repairs to a stop tap leak. He disputed the claims as he said he had not been advised of the appointments, and was on holiday at the time. In his escalation, he stated that an appointment for a damp survey was cancelled and the contractor subsequently failed to attend the rescheduled appointment.
4. In the landlord’s final response, it apologised that it had failed to confirm the appointment to repair the stop tap with the resident and it advised no additional appointments were required, unless the resident reported a further leak. It stated that an appointment had been booked for 23 August 2022 to complete a gas safety check, but it was unable to confirm whether it had sent a letter to the resident to advise him of the appointment. The gas safety check had since been successfully completed on 9 September 2022. It stated an appointment was scheduled for 13 September 2022 to assess the damp and mould in the property, but it was rescheduled to 15 September 2022, and the contractor was unable to gain access. It advised the resident to rebook the appointment. It noted that relevant information had been passed to managers to improve its service and it offered £100 compensation due to its poor communication and missed appointments.
5. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, he stated he remained dissatisfied as he disputed the landlord’s assertion that he had not permitted access to the property for the damp and mould inspection. He was also unhappy that the landlord had sent letters threatening his tenancy due to the no access appointments.

Assessment and findings

Policies and procedures

6. The tenancy agreement states that the resident is obliged to provide access to the landlord’s contractors for repairs and other works “subject to reasonable notice”.
7. The landlord’s gas compliance and safety checks procedure states that:
   1. “Steps will be taken in every case to contact the tenant by telephone, text messages, emails, and personal visits in addition to sending and hand delivering the prescribed letters to the tenant”.
   2. “When access is not granted, staff will follow the process of sending formal letters which escalate in severity with each stage of the process”.
8. The landlord’s complaint handling policy states it will respond to stage one complaints within ten working days and stage two complaints within 20 working days.

The landlord’s communication regarding appointments for a gas safety check, a stop tap leak and a damp and mould inspection

9. In accordance with the tenancy agreement, the resident is obliged to provide access for repair appointments and gas safety checks, provided the landlord gives reasonable notice, which is typically considered at least 24 hours, unless there is an emergency repair. As a result, the landlord should take steps to ensure the resident is informed of appointments, such as by sending letters or calling him.
10. It is not disputed that there were communication failings by the landlord regarding scheduling the appointments. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman assesses whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
11. The landlord acknowledged communication errors regarding scheduling the appointment for the stop tap leak. On 22 August 2022, the landlord raised a job to repair the stop tap leak in the resident’s flat, as his neighbour had reported a leak into their flat. The landlord left a voicemail to the resident advising an appointment would take place on 25 August 2022, however the contractor was unable to gain access and the resident later informed it he was on holiday at the time. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have taken additional steps to ensure the resident was aware of the appointment, in order to confirm the contractor would be able to gain access. It was therefore reasonable that the landlord apologised that it had not spoken to the resident to confirm the appointment and it took steps of learning to ensure it improved its communication to prevent similar issues. As the resident had confirmed the stop tap was not leaking, there was no further impact or detriment to the resident as no further appointments were required.
12. There were similar communication issues with the landlord’s handling of the gas safety appointment. The landlord has a legal obligation to maintain gas safety certificates on all the properties it is responsible for. As a result, it should take sufficient steps to ensure the resident is aware of any scheduled appointments, which are clearly outlined in its gas compliance and safety checks procedure. Although the landlord has provided evidence to this Service of a letter sent on 3 August 2022 advising the resident of an appointment on 23 August 2022, in its stage two response, it said it was unable to confirm whether the letter was sent to the resident. As a result, there is not sufficient evidence that the landlord acted in accordance with its gas compliance and safety checks procedure. It was therefore appropriate that the landlord recognised its communication error and stated that it had passed its findings to the relevant managers to prevents similar issues from occurring. The gas safety check was subsequently completed on 9 September 2022, so there was no lasting detriment to the resident.
13. In his complaint to this Service, the resident said he was dissatisfied that the landlord had sent letters threatening tenancy action following the missed appointments. The landlord was entitled to send letters reminding the resident of the tenancy agreement conditions regarding providing access, particularly as if the gas safety certificate had expired the landlord would be in breach of its legal obligations. However, once the landlord had identified that it had not taken the correct steps to inform the resident of the appointments, it would have been appropriate for it to have confirmed no tenancy action would be taken and offered an apology, to prevent any distress to the resident.
14. The resident had also raised concerns with the landlord’s handling of a damp and mould inspection. It is unclear when the resident initially reported damp and mould in the property, but it is evident from a letter sent on 23 June 2022 that the landlord was aware that a damp inspection was required, as it had attempted to attend and advised the resident to reschedule the appointment. The resident raised a complaint on 12 July 2022 regarding difficulties he had experienced rearranging the appointment and that he was dissatisfied a contractor had tried to arrange an appointment with less than 24 hours’ notice. Despite this, there is no evidence to suggest the landlord acknowledged the resident’s concerns until its stage one response on 5 September 2022, in which it advised it had referred the issue to the relevant department. As a result, there was a period of over two months where the landlord failed to take any action regarding damp and mould in the property. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the resident chased the appointment during this period.
15. An appointment was arranged for a surveyor to inspect the damp and mould on 13 September 2022, which was then rescheduled to 15 September 2022 but was not completed. There was a dispute between the resident and the landlord as to whether the contractor failed to attend or the resident did not provide access. The landlord has not demonstrated that it took sufficient steps to investigate the resident’s reports that the contractor had failed to attend the appointment, such as by discussing the issue with the contractor. As a result, it was unreasonable that the landlord maintained its assertion that the resident did not allow access to the property, so he was responsible for rescheduling the appointment. However, the landlord mitigated the impact of its failing to some extent as it managed the resident’s expectations regarding the actions that needed to be taken to proceed with the inspection. It is unclear whether the inspection has since been completed, if it remains outstanding, the landlord should contact the resident to schedule an appointment.
16. The landlord offered £100 compensation in recognition of its poor communication and the missed appointments. In accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance, awards of £50-£100 are appropriate in cases where there has been a service failure by the landlord which may have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident, but the impact was minimal and for a short duration of time. In this case, although the landlord’s failings caused distress and additional time and effort to the resident, ultimately the impact of the failings regarding the gas safety check and stop tap leak were limited as any required appointments were quickly rescheduled. As a result, the £100 compensation offered for the issues it had identified was proportionate.
17. However, the landlord’s poor communication regarding the damp and mould inspection meant the issue was outstanding for a prolonged period of time. The landlord has failed to recognise its period of inaction between 12 July 2022 and 5 September 2022, in which it did not respond to the resident’s concerns regarding issues rescheduling the appointment. As the landlord failed to acknowledge the additional failings identified in this report and the extent of the impact on the resident, further compensation is warranted. In accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance, awards of £50-£100 are appropriate in cases where the landlord’s offer of compensation does not reflect the detriment to the resident and the failings identified in this investigation. The landlord is therefore ordered to pay the resident an additional £100 compensation.

Complaint handling

18. The resident initially raised a complaint on 12 July 2022, however, the landlord failed to acknowledge it or issue a response. The resident subsequently raised a further complaint on 28 August 2022 and the landlord issued its stage one response on 5 September 2022. As a result, the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s initial complaint in line with its ten working day response timeframe. This caused additional time and effort to the resident in pursuing the complaint, and there was a missed opportunity for the landlord to address the resident’s concerns at an earlier date.
19. This Service’s Complaint Handling Code (published on our website) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations of landlords’ complaint handling practices. In accordance with the Code, the landlord is expected to address all points raised by the resident in a complaint, and provide clear reasons for its decisions. In this case, the resident raised concerns regarding issues with scheduling an appointment for a contractor to assess damp and mould in the property. However, the landlord did not fully address the resident’s concerns within its stage one response, as instead it stated it had referred the issue to the correct department. This resulted in additional time and effort to the resident in pursuing the issue.
20. As the landlord did not address the resident’s concerns with the damp and mould inspection in its stage one response, the resident did not have the opportunity to respond to the information provided in the stage two response. This was of particular concern as following the stage two response, the resident disputed that he had failed to provide access for the inspection, and the landlord stated it would not investigate the issue further as he had exhausted the complaint process. Given the landlord’s failings, it would have been appropriate for it to carry out an additional investigation as requested by the resident to ensure it had properly investigated the issue.
21. In accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance, awards of £100-£600 are appropriate in cases where the landlord has failed to acknowledge its failings or made an attempt to put things right. In this case, the landlord’s failure to respond to the complaint regarding the damp and mould inspection within its response timeframe or to address the issue in full in its stage one response meant that the issue was outstanding for a prolonged period of time, which caused additional inconvenience and time and effort to the resident. As a result, the landlord should award the resident £150 compensation. It should also give the resident the opportunity to raise any additional concerns he has regarding the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould inspection.

Determination

22. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in the way it handled the complaint about its communication regarding appointments for a gas safety check, a stop tap leak and a damp and mould inspection.
23. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in the way it handled the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

24. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident:
    1. £200 as a result of the landlord’s additional failings in its handling of the damp and mould inspection. This is inclusive of the £100 previously offered.
    2. £150 for its complaint handling failures. 
25. The landlord is ordered to carry out a damp and mould inspection if it has not done so already and complete any required repairs. 
26. The landlord should provide proof that it has complied with these orders within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

27. It is recommended that the landlord reviews its staff training requirements regarding complaint handling.