Tower Hamlets Homes (202204302)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202204302

Tower Hamlets Homes

19 October 2022

 

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 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 repairs to the communal door entry/intercom system at the resident’s property.

Background

  1. The property is a two-bedroom flat located on the first floor of a communal block. The property is accessed through a communal gate entry system, with the ringer located externally and a handset/intercom system located internally.
  2. The resident first reported issues with the door entry/intercom system within her property on 25 October 2021. She informed the landlord that the speaker on her handset was not working, resulting in her having missed deliveries and not knowing when someone was contacting her property. It attended on 28 October 2021, identifying several issues that required further investigation, but left the property without informing the resident. Hearing nothing further about this, she chased the landlord throughout 29 October and 4, 9, 10 and 15 November 2021. This was after it had confirmed that further works were required as her whole block was affected, but it could not attend when she required it to after 4pm, and she made a stage one complaint on 16 November 2021.
  3. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 30 November 2021. It highlighted that a follow-up appointment was cancelled in error by it on 10 November 2021 for the resident’s handset, but it further attended the property on 22 November 2021 with a specialist contractor. It was found that the fault had affected several properties across the block, and the door entry system would now need renewing, but the parts required to do so were obsolete and therefore made this difficult to repair. The landlord apologised to the resident and offered £20 compensation, agreeing to monitor the works to completion after receiving, reviewing and approving a quotation for renewal works. She remained dissatisfied with the repair duration, requesting a complaint escalation on 2 December 2021.
  4. The landlord issued its final stage complaint response on 10 January 2022, highlighting that the repair delays were due to a delay in obtaining the necessary parts to renew the door entry system, and miscommunication between it and its contractors in not informing the resident that the issue was communal. It apologised further for the inconvenience that this had caused her. The landlord subsequently confirmed in its communication to this Service on 23 September 2022 that the repairs remained outstanding following its attempts to complete these in July to August 2022. Rewiring and new parts were still required to fix the intercoms, but it had no plans to renew the door entry system as recommended by its specialist contractor.
  5. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought her complaint to this Service. She stated that her desired outcome was that the repairs were completed as soon as possible, highlighting that she was unable to receive any post, friends, or deliveries to the property while the repairs remained outstanding, for which it had made no alternative arrangements.

Assessment and findings

Policies

  1. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that it is responsible for repairing communal door entry systems and security gates and that, upon receiving a repair request, it will make an appointment and look to complete the repair within its agreed timescales. It will assign a repair category and, for repairs including “faulty electrical fittings and minor electrical faults”, it aims to deliver repairs within a 20-working-day timeframe. The landlord also specifies that, where certain jobs require an item to be manufactured, this may take longer to complete but that it will inform the resident of any delays. It aims to deliver repairs which are “right the first time”, indicating that no further callouts are required and a repair will not go past six months in duration.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the communal door entry/intercom system at the resident’s property

  1. In accordance with its responsive repairs policy, the landlord is responsible for repairing both the communal door entry system external to the resident’s property, as well as the handset installed there internally. It was therefore reasonable to expect that, when she first reported issues with her handset system to it on 25 October 2021, it would complete any necessary repairs to this within 20 working days. If this was not possible, it was reasonable to expect the landlord to have communicated any repair delays to her. This was not forthcoming in this case, however, leading the resident to chase the landlord for the outstanding repairs on 29 October and 4, 9, 10 and 15 November 2021.
  2. It is noted that, while the landlord had attended within its responsive repairs policy’s 20-working-day target deadline on 28 October 2021 to inspect the resident’s intercom/handset, its contractor had reportedly not explained the issues identified and left the property without informing her. She was unhappy with this behaviour and raised a stage one complaint to it on 16 November 2021, highlighting that the works remained outstanding.
  3. The landlord’s subsequent stage one complaint response on30 November 2021 informed the resident that several faults were found, and that it would need more time to investigate the scope of repair required, appropriately apologising for its contractor’s behaviour. Its works originally raised on 10 November 2021 for her handset were also cancelled in error by it due to incomplete information being given to the contractor. Ultimately, the landlord informed the resident that her intercom/door entry system was defective, but it failed to adequately provide her with an estimated completion timescale for the repairs required to this within six months, as required by its responsive repairs policy.
  4. The landlord highlighted in its final stage complaint response on 10 January 2022 that it was looking to renew the door entry system at the block, and that the delays to this were due to the specialist panels required in order to complete repairs to the resident’s internal handset. She nevertheless remained dissatisfied that the repairs had taken too long. While the landlord had looked to explain the delays, it is of concern that the repairs, first reported on 25 October 2021, are still outstanding, resulting in excessive delays far exceeding the landlord’s 20-working-day to six-month responsive repairs policy’s timeframe.
  5. It is also of concern that the renewal of the block’s door entry/intercom system recommended by the specialist contractor that inspected this in November 2021 was abandoned in September 2022, as well as that no alternative arrangements were made to help residents to manage without this facility. As a result, the below order has been made for the landlord to contact the resident to provide her with an estimated timescale for the completion of repairs to her door entry/intercom system. This additionally includes it providing her with a progress update on the arrival of the required parts for this, as well as it considering whether it is able to source the parts from a suitable alternative provider, if necessary.
  6. In cases where repairs are delayed due to the availability of a particular part, this Service would expect landlords to show that they had been regularly pursuing updates on these and relaying this information back to the resident. It is therefore vital that landlords keep an accurate and robust record of such contacts and repairs and, should there be a significant delay, in the interests of best practice consider sourcing the parts from an alternative provider. Yet evidence of this has not been comprehensive in this case.
  7. The landlord has failed to provide such comprehensive contemporaneous repair records for this investigation, including correspondence showing it chasing the outstanding parts to seek to reduce the repair delays experienced by the resident, indicating poor record keeping on its part. It has therefore been recommended below to review its record keeping processes to ensure that it has full, adequate records of its outstanding long-term repairs and related communication, in order to prevent this from recurring.
  8. It is noted the landlord had looked to remedy its failures by apologising and offering £20 compensation in its stage one complaint response on 30 November 2021.This did not reflect the impact caused to the resident by its repair delays to her door entry/intercom system from November 2021 to the present, however, that she reported as affecting her post, visitors and deliveries and not receiving an alternative from it for. The landlord’s compensation offer and apology also did not recognise the time and trouble she spent pursuing the complaint and the additional distress that this had caused her, alongside its identified failures above.
  9. Although the landlord was not responsible for the parts necessary to repair the resident’s door entry/intercom system being unavailable, it was responsible for not keeping her updated about this, considering a different source for the parts or providing her with an alternative to this facility. Therefore, as its redress and compensation policy recommended that it award compensation of up to £250 for her resulting time and trouble, and from £200 per year for her resulting distress and inconvenience, its £20 compensation offer to her was neither appropriate nor proportionate in this case.
  10. This is particularly given all of the identified failures, including the failure to complete the repairs within the landlord’s responsive repairs policy’s obligations and its failure to follow-up on the respective parts required. Compensation reflecting these failures has therefore been calculated in accordance with its redress and compensation policy’s above recommendations, and this Service’s revised remedies guidance’s similar recommendations for failure adversely affecting the resident, for which the landlord’s attempt to put right failed to address the detriment to her or to be proportionate to its failings. It has also been recommended below to review its staff’s relevant training needs in light of this.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the communal door entry/intercom system at the resident’s property.

Orders and recommendations

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Contact the resident within four weeks to provide an estimated timescale for the completion of its repairs to her communal door entry/intercom system, as well as chase and provide her with an update on the parts required to complete the necessary repairs to the door entry/intercom system. It is also to consider if it is able to source the parts from a suitable alternative supplier, if necessary.
    2. Pay the resident £270 total compensation within four weeks, consisting of £250 additional compensation plus the £20 compensation that it already offered her if she has not received this already, for the failures identified on its part in her case.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Review its record keeping processes to ensure that it has full, adequate records of its outstanding long-term repairs and related communication.
    2. Review its staff’s training needs regarding their application of its responsive repairs policy and redress and compensation policy, and this Service’s revised remedies guidance at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/corporate-information/policies/dispute-resolution/policy-on-remedies/, in relation to outstanding long-term repairs.
  3. The landlord shall contact this Service within four weeks to confirm that it has complied with the above orders, and whether it will follow the above recommendations.