Network Homes Limited (202117506)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202117506

Network Homes Limited

20 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 reports concerning the condition and maintenance of the exterior parts of her building.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, residing in a two bedroom, self-contained maisonette in a communal building.
3. The resident advised the landlord that external cyclical repairs and decorative works to the communal areas of her building had been outstanding for a number of years. She advised it that the building was in a poor state, and that she had been advised by the landlord that there were no cyclical works planned for her building in the near future. She made a formal complaint to the landlord to this effect on 18 January 2021, stating that this was a breach of her tenancy agreement, which said that cyclical works would normally be carried out every five years, and these had not been carried out to the exterior of her building since 2010.
4. The landlord’s overall response was that, although the tenancy agreement stated that cyclical works would normally be carried out every five years, due to new government legislation relating to essential fire safety work, the timescale for cyclical works had been increased to ten years, in order for it to fulfil its increased statutory obligations in relation to fire safety works. The landlord also informed her that Covid-19 had also delayed its ability to carry out cyclical works. However, it did advise her that it was planning to carry out cyclical works to the exterior of her building during the financial year 2022 to 2023. It did not uphold her complaint, saying that it was not in breach of the tenancy agreement, referring to  unforeseen circumstances and that it had interpreted legal advice that it had sought, to also come to the same conclusion.
5. The resident then contacted this Service and advised that the exterior of her building was in a state of “disrepair”, and wanted this Service to investigate her claim that the landlord was in breach of her tenancy agreement.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports concerning the condition and maintenance of the exterior parts of her building

6. The landlord’s obligation in the tenancy agreement, under section 2.6, is to keep the exterior of the premises and any common parts in a good state of decoration and normally to decorate these areas once every five years. Section 2.6 of the tenancy agreement does not make it mandatory upon the landlord to fulfil this obligation every five years, indeed it appears to be more of a general guideline rather than a precise date.
7. This appears to be the correct understanding of the obligation because of the landlord’s first stage complaints response, in which it stated that it strove to carry out its obligation, under section 2.6, “every seven years”, although it did inform her that this had been increased to “every ten years”, due to it having to reallocate its financial budget, in order to fulfil its statutory obligations in line with essential fire safety works legislation from 2017 onwards.
8. Even if it were a mandatory requirement for it to carry out cyclical works every five years, the landlord had made its position clear to the resident in its final stage complaints response, where it had stated that due to Covid-19, any obligation to normally carry out cyclical works, every five years, would not apply, as these were not “normal circumstances”. Additionally, the landlord had sought independent legal advice, its interpretation of that legal advice had supported its position and it had advised the resident of this. The landlord also sought to manage the resident’s expectations by giving her a set timeframe for the cyclical works to be carried out, that being during the financial year 2022 to 2023.
9. Therefore, the landlord was not in breach of its obligations to the resident, under section 2.6 of the tenancy agreement. This is because, it is reasonable that the landlord’s normal operating procedure would have been affected by Covid-19. It was also reasonable for the landlord to divert its finances away from cyclical decorative works, towards fulfilling its statutory obligations relating to essential fire safety works instead. It had also sought independent legal advice, which it interpreted as supporting its position. As a result, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports regarding the condition and maintenance of the exterior parts of her building.

The landlord’s complaint handling

10. The landlord’s complaints policy, under section 3.8, states that the landlord aims to respond to 90% of stage one complaints within ten working days of receipt of the complaint, and 90% of stage two complaints within 20 working days of receipt of the complaint. Section 3.9 states that where the landlord is unable to meet the target timescales, it will send a letter to the resident, explaining the reasons for the delay, and will provide a new target date.
11. It is noted that the first stage response to the resident has an incorrect complaint receipt date of 27 December 2020. Evidence provided by the landlord shows that the complaint was actually received on 18 January 2021.
12. The resident made her formal complaint to the landlord on 18 January 2021, and the landlord issued its first stage response on 11 February 2021, which was 18 working days later. This means that the landlord’s response was 8 working days late. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 27 January 2021, 7 working days after the complaint was received. The first stage response was sent 10 working days after the case was logged and acknowledged. Although the landlord’s first stage complaints response was 8 working days late from the date the complaint was received, this had no significant impact on the outcome of her complaint. Whilst the landlord did not adhere to its complaint policy, it did manage the resident’s expectations as it advised her she would get a response within the next 10 working days, which it did. The Housing Ombudsman’s complaint handling code states that a response at stage one should be issued within 10 working days from the date the complaint is logged and as this was the case, although differing from the landlord’s complaint policy. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to review its complaint policy to ensure that it has clarity about its timescales.
13. It is noted that the acknowledgement letter was 2 working days late, however,  this did not impact the resident or have an effect on the overall outcome of the case.
14. The resident escalated her formal complaint on 15 February 2021, and the landlord issued its final stage complaints response on 16 March 2021, 21 working days later. Although the landlord’s response was one working day over its target timescale, this did not impact the resident or affect the outcome of the complaint, and therefore, does not constitute service failure.

Determination

15. Under paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord, in relation to its response to the resident’s reports concerning the condition and maintenance of the exterior parts of her building.
16. Under paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in relation to its complaint handling.

Recommendations

17. The landlord is recommended to review its complaints policy and remind its staff of the importance of meeting policy timescales in relation to stage one and stage two complaints responses, and in relation to informing residents of any delays as per its obligations in its complaints policy.
18. The landlord is recommended to ensure that complaint letters are checked prior to being sent to residents, to avoid incorrect information such as dates being sent out.