Peabody Trust (201902535)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201902535

Peabody Trust

28 February 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 response to the resident’s complaint about the replacement of the windows at her property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
3. The resident complained to this Service in 2019, but the case was subsequently closed. There is evidence that the resident’s MP made enquiries of the landlord on her behalf in May 2020 regarding the state of the windows. Between May 2020 and January 2021, the resident continued to chase the replacement of her windows. The evidence shows that the landlord inspected the property on several occasions and, after some debate between contractors and the landlord’s surveyors, it carried out repairs to the resident’s windows.
4. The resident made an enquiry to the landlord in January 2022. She said that she had been promised several times that her windows would be replaced, but every time the due date came and went without resolution. She asked the landlord to confirm its intentions, so that she could “proceed further with this matter.”
5. The landlord responded on 26 January 2022. It explained that the most recent inspection had concluded the windows were in good condition and would not be replaced until the next financial year (2022/2023). It went on to explain how it prioritised large scale work, and the impact the Covid lock downs had had on its major work schedules. On 20 February the resident asked the landlord to escalate her concerns to a complaint.
6. Following two interventions by this Service, the landlord issued its complaint response on 24 June 2022. It acknowledged that the resident was seeking the replacement of her windows because they were “single glazed and rotten.” It provided a summary of its actions regarding the windows back to June 2020. It explained that on one or two occasions the resident had declined repairs as she wanted the windows replaced. It confirmed that multiple inspections had concluded the windows could be overhauled/renewed, rather than replaced, which it said would happen in the 2022/2023 financial year. The landlord used the terms overhaul and renew interchangeably in its response. It is not apparent if there is any difference between the two.
7. The resident escalated the complaint on 10 July 2022. She disputed some of the landlord’s explanations, including that she had not provided access to contractors. She also asked the landlord why events prior to 2020 were not taken into account for its investigation.
8.  The landlord issued its final response on 9 August 2022. It responded to the issues the resident raised, explaining why it would not look at older time periods and the basis for saying she had declined some repairs. It explained again that it would only replace windows that could not be repaired, but agreed to arrange another window survey to assess their current condition. It acknowledged that there had been a lack of clarity about its intentions towards the windows and that the resident had spent time chasing the matter. It offered her compensation of £250 for that inconvenience.
9. In August 2022, the landlord’s surveyors inspected the resident’s windows and reported that they were now suitable for replacement. The landlord confirmed this to the resident and advised that works were unlikely to commence before March 2023, and more likely to be expected in April.
10. The resident referred her complaint to this Service as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s offer of compensation and with the timeframe provided to replace her windows.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

11. In her complaint to the landlord and Ombudsman the resident explained that her concerns related to the length of time taken by the landlord to replace her windows since 2009. She also disputed the landlord’s account of some of its repair visits in 2020, which it said she had refused access for. However, complaints to the Ombudsman are time-limited. That means that, in line with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman expects a complaint to be raised by a tenant with a landlord within six months of the events giving rise to the complaint, and to then subsequently exhaust the landlord’s complaints process. In this case, the resident made a complaint to the landlord in mid-2020, via a counsellor, but there is no evidence that the complaints process was exhausted until the resident’s complaint in 2022. Because of that, this investigation cannot consider the resident’s concerns about the landlord’s actions dating back to 2009. The investigation, therefore, centres on the events in the months leading up to the resident’s complaint in 2022. References to earlier events are for context and clarity only.

Handling of resident’s complaint about window replacements

12.  The landlord’s repairs policy sets out that the landlord is responsible for repairing or replacing windows’ glazing and frames. Nothing in the landlord’s policies, nor in the resident’s tenancy agreement, states that the landlord is obliged to replace windows’ after a certain number of years and, as the landlord has explained, it would only replace them when these are beyond repair.
13. Following enquiries by the resident’s MP, the landlord told her on 3 November 2021 that the surveyor, who had previously inspected her property, had concluded that the windows did not require replacing, and could be repaired instead. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the opinion of its operatives at that point, and its decision to repair rather than replace was in line with its policy.
14. The resident remained frustrated with the landlord’s decision and raised a complaint about it in February 2022. The landlord failed to provide its response within 10 working days, as established in the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. This Service intervened with the landlord on 8 March 2022 and 20 June 2022. The landlord issued a complaint response on 24 June 2022, approximately four months after the resident’s complaint. That was a significant delay. Nonetheless, throughout this time, the landlord was in contact with the resident on various occasions, confirming the windows would be replaced the following financial year.
15. In its complaint response, the landlord acknowledged the complaint was about the resident’s view that the windows were damaged and needed to be replaced. It presented a summary of events dating back to 2020. It explained that it had followed its surveyor’s recommendations throughout 2020 and 2021, who following an inspection, declared the resident’s windows could be overhauled. It stated that the resident refused for works to be carried out on July 2020 and December 2020. The landlord confirmed that the resident’s windows were due to be renewed in the 2022-2023 financial year, which had already been communicated to the resident in March 2022. The landlord addressed each point raised by the resident and appropriately explained its plan of action to solve the resident’s complaint. It conducted a thorough investigation of the events related to the complaint. However, the landlord failed to apologise for its delayed complaint response, and did not explain the reasons for it..
16. Following the resident’s request, the landlord escalated the complaint on 18 July 2022.
17. In its final complaint response, the landlord explained why it had said the resident had declined some repair visits. While the resident disputed the allegation, this investigation cannot seek to determine which of the two accounts of events was correct. Rather, we can determine that the landlord’s response was reasonable and based on the evidence it had.
18. Finally, the landlord acknowledged the delays in providing its stage one response and attempted to put things right by offering £100 compensation for it. Moreover, the landlord offered and extra £150 for the time and trouble incurred on the resident and apologised for her need to chase the complaint. Acknowledging its complaint handling delays, apologising, and providing compensation were reasonable remedies to the landlord’s complaint handling shortcomings.
19. Following the landlord’s final response, an inspection was carried out as promised, which assessed the windows as now being suitable for replacement (as opposed to overhaul, renewal, or repair). The landlord confirmed this to the resident and said that installation was likely to be done in April 2023.
20. It is clear and understandable from the resident’s correspondence that she has experienced frustration and exasperation for the period she has been trying to resolve her concerns about the windows. However, in the specific period considered in this investigation, the landlord’s actions and explanations were in line with the views and opinions of its technical operatives, and nothing in the evidence suggests that it was unreasonable to accept those views. The landlord’s failing was in its initial complaint handling, which it resolved and remedied suitably in its final complaint response.

Determination

21. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.