Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Wandle Housing Association Limited (202214608)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202214608

Wandle Housing Association Limited

27 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 handling of a bedroom window repair.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
  2. On 29 March 2022, the resident reported that her bedroom window lock wasn’t working and wouldn’t close properly. The landlord attended the property on 22 April 2022 and concluded that a specialist was needed to repair the window.
  3. The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 29 May 2022. She was dissatisfied that she had not been contacted about a further repair appointment. Additionally, the landlord’s online repair system stated that the repair had been completed, yet this was not the case. The landlord’s response was dated 8 June 2022. It acknowledged that the repair had not been completed and stated that it would organise for this to be rectified. The resident did not receive this response until after she chased for a reply on 14 June 2022. She requested that her complaint be escalated on the same day, as she was unhappy that she had to chase for a response. She also was dissatisfied with the landlord’s reply, as the repair remained outstanding.
  4. The resident added to her complaint on 10 July 2022. She was dissatisfied that she been offered a repair appointment on 8 August 2022, as her repairs would then have been outstanding for over four months. Additionally, the resident was unhappy that the landlord had neglected to acknowledge her escalation request until she had chased for a response on 23 June 2022.
  5. The landlord responded on 2 August 2022. It explained that after the initial repair appointment on 22 April 2022, it had neglected to raise a follow-on work order and had mistakenly closed the repair. It stated that this had caused a delay in completing the repair works and apologised for causing the resident stress and inconvenience. It offered the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the impact of its errors. The resident said she was unhappy that it had not replied within the timescales laid out in its complaint policy. In response, the landlord later offered her an additional £30 in recognition of the further failings in the handling of her complaint.
  6. In her complaint to this Service the resident has stated that as of 24 November 2022 her repair remains outstanding. She has also stated that the landlord did not send the £30 compensation it had subsequently offered her. To resolve this issue, the resident would like the work completed and for additional compensation to be considered in view of the continued delay.

Assessment

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for maintaining the structure and outside of the property. Its repair and maintenance policy clarifies that this includes repairs for windows, including the frames, catches and cords.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy defines emergency repairs as those that are necessary to avoid danger to occupants, or serious damage to the property. The initial emergency repairs may only make the property safe, and a further appointment may be necessary to complete the full repair. Examples given of an emergency include unsecure external doors and windows. These repairs should be completed within 24 hours. If there is no immediate safety or security risk involved, then the replacing of door and window furniture is included in the landlord’s examples of routine repairs. These repairs should be completed within 28 days.
  3. According to the above policies, the landlord should respond within emergency timeframes if there is a health and safety risk involved regarding the unsecure window. It is arguable that a window that cannot be closed, on the fourth floor of an apartment building would pose a safety risk. The landlord would therefore be expected to attend within the 24-hour emergency timeframe to secure the window, returning to complete the repair within its 28-day routine repair timeframe at a later date. This did not occur, as the resident reported the repair on 29 March 2022, with the landlord attending on 22 April 2022. The landlord also neglected to make the resident’s window secure throughout the entirety of this case. This is a significant failing by the landlord.
  4. As well as exceeding its expected timescale for emergency repairs, the landlord failed to complete the repairs within the standard routine repair timeframes. The window latch was still broken in November 2022, eight months after the resident first reported it in March 2022. The landlord has not adequately explained the reasons for this delay and therefore the Ombudsman can only conclude that the delay was unreasonable.
  5. The landlord made repeated errors in the handling of the resident’s repair and failed to manage it effectively. It initially closed the repair log after its first visit in April 2022, rather than raising follow on works which were needed to complete the repair. It was only after the resident had chased her repairs and submitted her complaint that the landlord offered her an appointment for 8 July 2022. As this appointment was not convenient for the resident, the landlord finally attended on 8 August 2022. It concluded that a specialist part for the window needed to be ordered. After reattending the property on 21 September 2022, the landlord realised that it had ordered the wrong part. It re-ordered the part, but again discovered on 20 October 2022 that it was the wrong one. Throughout the repair, the landlord did not update the resident and did not provide adequate communication. These multiple errors caused a substantial delay to the repairs, which still do not appear to have been rectified. This has been taken into account when assessing compensation.
  6. This Service’s Complaint Handling Code (published on our website) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that where the landlord has made mistakes, it should identify these errors in its complaint responses. It should also aim to explain what went wrong, and endeavor to put things right. The landlord’s initial complaint response was not appropriate, as it did not apologise for the delay to the resident’s repairs. It also did not acknowledge that it had caused the delay by neglecting to order follow on works and closing the repair.
  7. The landlord’s final complaint response was more reasonable as it explained why the delay had occurred. It took ownership of the mistakes it had made and apologised. The landlord also acted appropriately by offering the resident compensation, in recognition of the delay and inconvenience. It initially neglected to acknowledge the resident’s concerns about its complaint handling in its response, but subsequently apologised for the delayed responses, and acted reasonably by offering an additional £30 compensation, in recognition of these delays. 
  8. However, the landlord did not pay the resident the extra £30 compensation it had offered. The resident has continued to chase for her repair to be completed and it is not clear from the available evidence whether the repair has now been completed. Again, according to the Code, the landlord is expected to follow through any stated intentions stated in its response through to fruition. The fact that it did not is a failing and further compensation is due in view of this.
  9. The Ombudsman’s approach to compensation is set out in our Remedies Guidance (published on our website). In line with the guidance, the Ombudsman may award between £100 to £600 in cases where we have found that there was a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident. The landlord has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. In this case, as set out above the landlord has acknowledged some failings and offered compensation but its offer did not take into account the continued delay after the landlord’s final response to the complaint and is therefore not considered proportionate.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of a bedroom window repair.

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £370 compensation, in recognition of the resident’s distress and inconvenience in pursuing her repair. This is in addition to the £130 previously offered by the landlord which should also be paid if it has not been paid already.
    2. Ensure that the resident’s window latch is fully repaired. If it has not done so already.