The Guinness Partnership Limited (202226739)

Back to Top

 

A picture containing font, text, graphics, logo Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226739

The Guinness Partnership Limited

26 June 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 the repairs to the resident’s windows and back door and the level of compensation offered.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. She has various vulnerabilities that the landlord is aware of.
  2. The landlord’s records show that the resident reported that her back door was swollen and draughty and that some of her windowpanes had ‘blown’ on 13 September 2021. The landlord attended the next day on 14 September 2021 and found that follow on works were required. The resident made a complaint about the delays to her window and door repairs on 18 November 2021.
  3. The landlord attended on 9 December 2021 to inspect the works. The landlord has stated that it had an appointment to attend on 16 December 2021 for follow on works, but this was cancelled due to the resident testing positive for Covid-19. The resident’s repairs to her windows were mistakenly cancelled rather than rescheduled. The landlord re-raised the resident’s window repairs on 11 February 2022. On 17 February 2022 the resident reported that in addition to the blown windowpanes, her window frames were rotten and one of the downstairs windows would not close.
  4. The landlord responded to the resident on 26 February 2022. It apologised for the delays in the resident’s repairs. It stated that it had delayed an inspection for the backdoor from 16 February 2022, as the resident wanted the door and windows repaired at the same time. It assured the resident that it would contact her for a new appointment. The landlord offered a total of £150 compensation to the resident.
  5. The landlord’s contractor attended on 20 May 2022 to repair the resident’s windowpanes. They advised that the windows should be replaced. The landlord attended on 7 June 2022 to measure the back door and the windowpanes.  The landlord sent its final response on 21 July 2022. It acknowledged that there had been delays in repairing the back door and windows. It revised its compensation offer to £350 compensation (£250 for the overall stress and inconvenience and £100 for time and trouble). It attended on 25 July 2022, repairing the windowpanes and replacing the back door.
  6. The resident reported that the back door was still draughty on 11 October 2022. The landlord attended on 14 October 2022 and found that it needed to replace the back door glass. It fitted the new glass on 24 November 2022. The resident stated that she remained unhappy with the original fitting of the door and that it let in draughts. The landlord attended on 29 November 2022 and inspected the door, it agreed to remove and refit it.
  7. The resident made another complaint on 30 November 2022 about the repairs to her back door. She also stated that the repairs to the windows were not fit for purpose. The landlord responded on 14 December 2022, it stated that it had already investigated the issues with the window and doorframes and that it was unable to respond further. The landlord arranged to attend on 15 December 2022 to remove and refit the door and repair a windowpane. It cancelled due to the weather and rearranged to attend on 16 January 2023. The landlord sent its stage two response on 10 January 2023. It explained that it should have escalated the resident’s complaint at stage one and investigated the new concerns of the resident. It offered £30 compensation for this aspect. Having assessed the complaint, the landlord did not identify any failings.
  8. The landlord re-scheduled the appointment on 16 January 2023 to 23 January 2023. The work did not go ahead due to extreme weather. The landlord rebooked the appointment, first for 22 February 2023, and then 28 March 2023. However, the resident was not available as she had hospital appointments on both dates. After contact from this Service on 8 March 2023, the landlord offered an additional £100 compensation and promised to inspect the window and doors after it completed the repairs. On 19 April 2023, the landlord attended and concluded that the back door did need replacing. It repaired the windowpane and rescheduled a further appointment for 11 May 2023.
  9. The resident has complained to this Service that she has been through the landlord’s complaint procedure twice and the repairs still remain outstanding. She has stated that the landlord’s communication has been poor, and that it continually books appointments without checking her availability. She is also dissatisfied with the amount of compensation offered.

Assessment

Backdoor

  1. Under the resident’s tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible to keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the premises including the door, doorframes and windows. Additionally, the landlord’s repair policy states that routine repairs are those which are not emergencies. It aims to complete such repairs within 28 days. The policy states that the landlord will normally repair rather than replace individual elements. However, where either the repair would be poorer value for money or ineffective, then the landlord will replace the element. This decision will be made at the landlord’s discretion. The landlord defines planned or cyclical maintenance as work that is carried out on an agreed cycle or as part of its planned reinvestment in its homes. This can be both substantial works carried out over a longer time frames or the cyclical repair or upgrade of components of a property.
  2. The resident first reported her back door was letting in draughts on 13 September 2021. The landlord acted appropriately by attending the next day and inspecting the door. However, it then did not attend until 9 December 2021 where it inspected the works again. This was already outside of its stated repair timescale of 28 days. The resident postponed the next appointment due to a positive Covid-19 test. The landlord closed the appointment rather than re-scheduling it, without informing the resident. The resident continued to chase her repairs throughout the next few months, yet the landlord did not re-raise the repairs until February 2022. This was not appropriate, as the landlord should have communicated to the resident that she needed to rebook the repair once she had recovered. It also should have raised the repairs once the resident continued to chase for an update. This was a failing in the circumstances.
  3. The landlord arranged to attend the property on 16 February 2022. However, the resident asked to delay the appointment until the windows could be completed at the same time as the back door, to minimise disruption. Additionally, between 18 March 2022, to 21 April 2022, the resident was unavailable, due to significant health issues that were being treated. The landlord acted reasonably by working flexibly with the resident to attend when she was next available.
  4. The resident stated she was available from 21 April 2022, and so the landlord attended on 20 May 2022 to measure the back door and windows. It found that it could not complete the window repair and did not undertake any repairs. A different contractor attended on 6 June 2022 to measure up again, with the door finally being replaced on 25 July 2022. The landlord inspected the door at least four times over this period. It completed the works three months after the resident became available again in April 2022 and 11 months after the original reports of the broken door. The overall time taken was unreasonable.
  5. On 11 October 2022, the resident reported that her door replacement had been completed to a poor standard and she was still experiencing draughts. She also reported that the glass pane in the door had broken. The landlord attended within two days, however it turned up on the wrong date. It attended again on 14 October 2022 and inspected the glass, but did not consider re-fitting the door. It cancelled another appointment on 10 November 2022 as it had an issue with staffing. The landlord attended on 24 November 2022 and fixed the broken glass.
  6. After the resident continued to report the door, the landlord then attended to inspect it on 29 November 2022. This was its third visit to look at the door. It subsequently agreed that it was not fitting into the frame properly and decided to refit it. The landlord cancelled the refit on 15 December 2022 due to poor weather, arranging it for a month later on 16 January 2023. It then re-scheduled again on the day of the appointment due to issues with staffing. The landlord again cancelled the appointment on 23 January 2023 due to extreme weather and rebooked for 22 February 2023. This was five months after the resident had reported that the repairs had not been correctly undertaken.
  7. The landlord inspected the door three times before deciding to re-fit it. It then cancelled the appointment twice because of staffing issues, twice for poor weather and attended once on the wrong date. In total this amounted to five re-arranged appointments and eight scheduled appointments to assess and refit the door. This is an excessive number of appointments and would have caused disruption to the resident. Each cancelled appointment pushed back the resident’s repair, causing further delays.
  8. The landlord did not confer with the resident about her availability, it booked an appointment first on 22 February 2023 and then on 28 March 2023, despite the resident having medical appointments on both days. The landlord attended to repair the door on 19 April 2023, seven months after the resident reported the door, and concluded that the door could not be re-fitted and would need to be replaced. While it is reasonable for the landlord to consider if a repair would be possible before it replaced the door, the length of time and the number of visits and rearranged appointments was not appropriate and was a failing. This was further compounded by the fact that repairs were completed earlier and the issues still persisted.

Windows

  1. The resident reported that several of her windowpanes were ‘blown’ on 13 September 2021. The landlord would be expected to attend and repair the issue within its stated timescale of 28 days. The landlord acted appropriately by attending the next day and inspecting the works. However, it then did not attend again until 9 December 2021, where is inspected the works again, but did not undertake any repairs. This was outside of the landlord’s own repair timescale of 28 days. The resident cancelled the next appointment on 16 December 2021 due to testing positive for Covid – 19.
  2. The landlord closed the repair in error, rather than rescheduling. It re-raised the works on 11 February 2022, following her complaint. The resident reported throughout February 2022 that her window frames were rotten, and one downstairs would not close. The resident was then unavailable from March 2022 to 21 April 2022.
  3. The contractors attended on 20 May 2022 to repair the windowpanes and stated that they were beyond repair. The landlord subsequently realised that it had sent the wrong contractor to the property, as they only dealt with UPVC windows, and the property had exclusively wooden window frames. This was not appropriate, as the landlord was aware and should have sent appropriate staff to the resident’s property to minimise disruption and to fulfil its repair obligation. It sent a different contractor to the property on 7 June 2022 to again measure the windowpanes for repair. The landlord rescheduled a repair booked for 19 July 2022 due to extreme weather, finally repairing the windows on 25 July 2022, 11 months after the resident reported the issue. This was excessive, even taking into consideration the resident’s unavailability and weather issues outside its control.
  4. The delay in the resident’s repairs appears to have been caused by the landlord initially closing the repair without completing it, and then needing to re-inspect the windows once it re-opened the works. It also had to inspect the works repeatedly, due to changing the contractors who would be completing the job. This was inappropriate, as the resident experienced an unnecessary delay to her repairs as a result. She also had numerous visits to the property, which can be viewed as excessive in the circumstances.
  5. The resident continued to maintain that the windows should have been replaced. She complained again on 30 November 2022 that the repairs were not fit for purpose and that another windowpane had ‘blown’. Although the landlord’s repair policy states that it has discretion to decide if items need to be renewed, the landlord would need to assess the information it was given to ensure it made the correct repair decision. The evidence shows that the landlord’s contractors recommended that the windows should be replaced, as they were in a poor condition. There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord considered replacing the windows during this time, even though it was advised to do so. This was a failing, as the landlord did not consider all its options to correctly arrive at its conclusion. The landlord finally replaced the windowpane on 19 April 2023, nearly five months after the resident reported it.
  6. The landlord acted appropriately in its initial responses on 26 February 2022 and 21 July 2022, by acknowledging the delays and apologising. It offered a total of £350 compensation to the resident. After the resident complained again in November 2022, stating that the landlord had not undertaken the repairs correctly, the landlord refused to escalate this aspect as a complaint. This was inappropriate, as the issues were about the ongoing problems with the landlord’s repairs about the same issue.
  7. The landlord accepted that it should have escalated the resident’s complaint in its stage two response on 10 January 2023, and offered £30 compensation for this aspect. It assessed its handling of the repairs, and did not identify any failings. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have highlighted the need for repeated repairs and discussed a long-term solution for improving the condition of the windows. The landlord also should have acknowledged the excessive number of visits and cancellations, and recognised the disruption this had caused to the resident. As such, the landlord’s complaint response did not adequately address its failings in this case.
  8. After being contacted by this Service, the landlord offered an additional £100 to the resident on 8 March 2023. It is appropriate that the landlord recognised that it had caused unnecessary delays and offered compensation. However, the resident’s repairs were outstanding from September 2021, to at least May 2023. Despite the landlord’s efforts, the issues remained the same, without a meaningful resolution. In light of the failings identified, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the overall handling of the issues amounted to maladministration and the landlord failed to offer reasonable redress.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs to the resident’s windows and back door and the level of compensation offered.

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £1000 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the delays in completing an effective repair to the resident’s back door and windows and for the disruption this has caused. This is inclusive of the £380 previously offered, which can be deducted from the amount if already paid.
    2. Liaise with the resident and arrange a suitable appointment to replace her back door if it has not done so already.
    3. Arrange for qualified operatives to assess the resident’s windows and consider if a replacement is required, if it has not done so already.
  2. Evidence of compliance with the above orders must be sent to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.