ForHousing Limited (202115718)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202115718

ForHousing Limited

20 September 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Remedial repairs to the resident’s roof, bathroom and downstairs toilet.
2. The associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The tenancy started on 9 September 2019. The property is a 3 bedroom house.
The tenant lives at the property with her partner, sister, and daughter.
The resident has given permission for an advocate to act on her behalf. For the purposes of this report, both the resident and her advocate will be referred to as ‘the resident’.

Policies, procedures and legal obligations

In line with its statutory obligations under s11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the tenancy agreement says that the landlord will:
1. Keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair, including:
  1. The roof, drains, gutters and external pipes.
  2. Outside walls, outside doors, windowsills and window frames.
  3. Major internal plaster work.
  4. Chimneys and chimney stacks (but not sweeping the chimneys).
2. Keep in repair and proper working order any installations provided or adopted by it for space heating, water heating and sanitation and for the supply of water, gas and electricity, including:
  1. Water pipes and tanks, gas pipes and electrical wiring inside the property.
  2. Electrical sockets and switches (but not plugs, fuses, light bulbs).
  3. Basins, sinks, baths, showers fitted by it, toilets, flushing systems, waste pipes and tap washers.
  4. Water heater, boilers and central heating installations.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy says:
1. Emergency repairs can be reported 24 hours per day, seven days a week via a range of channels. Outside of normal working hours, the service will as a minimum make the property safe and secure.
2. It will endeavour to ensure that responsive repairs are completed in one visit, ‘right first time’.
3. It will arrange appointments, at the first point of reporting, for all non- emergency internal and external repairs.
4. If a repair cannot be completed within the stated timescale (e.g., if materials have to be specially ordered) the contractor will inform the tenant of the revised timescale, which may, due to the nature of the works, be progressed as investment works outside of this policy.
At the time of the complaint, the landlord operated a three stage complaints process. The first response stage focused on identifying and agreeing an appropriate remedy to the complainant’s initial complaint within 2 working days. Stage 1 complaints were responded to within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints involved an independent review of the complaint carried out within 5 working days of escalation, or within 21 working days of escalation where a complaints panel was required. Notification of the outcome of the review panel could be expected within 5 working days of the hearing.
The landlord’s discretionary financial redress guidance document says that for non-quantifiable financial redress relating to inconvenience, distress and detriment, the following guidance applies:
1. Low: £25 – £250 for mild inconvenience and/or mild distress.
2. Moderate: £250 – £700 for prolonged mild inconvenience and/or distress or short-term moderate inconvenience and/or distress and/or detriment.
3. High: £700+ for serious or prolonged inconvenience, distress or detriment.

Summary of events

On 14 December 2020, the resident reported that the ceiling above the bath was cracked and leaking. They said that it was a slight crack at first, however it had got worse with the rain, which had caused a deeper, longer crack and water was leaking through. The landlord raised an urgent 3 day repair and attended to complete the work on 15 December 2020.
The landlord raised follow on work on 6 January 2021 for scaffolding to be erected to the side of the property to renew broken slates and clean out the gutter. The target date for completion of the work was 1 June 2021.
On 19 March 2021, the resident reported that the floorboards under the bath were rotten, which had been an ongoing issue, and had caused a lot of damage to the downstairs toilet. The landlord raised an urgent 3 day repair and attended on 24 March 2021. The job was signed off as complete with follow on work required for the downstairs toilet ceiling to be renewed and skimmed.
The landlord attended the resident’s property again on 26 March 2021 to complete the ceiling works. Follow on work was raised on 30 March 2021, with a target date of 23 August 2021, as the bath was still leaking upstairs. The follow on work was for:
1. A plumber to find and fix the leak before plastering work could begin.
2. Plasterers to hack off, drill and inject in bathroom and hallway; hack off, dub out and skim and renew ceiling double board; hack off, dub out and skim in upstairs toilet as the leak had blown the plaster on the wall.
3. Plumber to remove toilet sink and radiator in downstairs toilet for plasterers to gain access behind.
4. Gas cupboard in downstairs toilet to be capped.
A further job was raised by the landlord on 30 March 2021 to board and skim the downstairs bathroom ceiling. The landlord attended on 28 May 2021. The job was signed off as complete with no follow-on work raised. The operative commented that the leak needed to be repaired before plastering work could be carried out.
The resident contacted the landlord to make a complaint on 28 May 2021. This was dealt with at the ‘first response’ informal stage. The resident was unhappy that there were outstanding repairs to the downstairs toilet, and upstairs bathroom. The resident said the walls were black, there were mushrooms growing, and the sub floor under the bath needed attention, which meant that the bath needed to be taken out. The resident said that the bathroom ceiling issues were because there was a hole in the roof above. Various operatives had attended but not done any work, as the wrong trade had turned up to do the wrong work.
The landlord responded on 3 June 2021 and said that the bathroom works were already scheduled for 16 August 2021. The resident was given dates for three further outstanding jobs, which they agreed were acceptable, however if anything further went wrong, the resident said they would escalate the complaint. The dates given were:
1. Roof works booked in for the 9 June 2021.
2. Bedroom ceiling plastering booked in for the 8 June 2021.
3. Plastering and plumbing works booked in for the 19,21,22 and 26 July 2021.
The landlord attended the resident’s property on 9 June 2021 to complete the roofing work. The broken slate was replaced and the gutter cleaned out. The job was signed off as complete.
The landlord attended the resident’s property between 19 July 2021 and 26 July 2021 to complete the plastering and plumbing works. The plumber raised follow on work to re-raise the job once the joists and floorboards had been renewed in the bathroom.
On 2 August 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to raise a complaint, however, the landlord noted that a complaint had already been raised by them and dealt with at the ‘first response’ stage. Therefore, the complaint was logged at stage 1.
The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint investigation acknowledgement letter on 16 August 2021. It said:
1. It apologised for the delay in acknowledging the complaint. It had been the subject of a cyber security incident on 26 July 2021 which resulted in all its systems being taken offline as a precautionary measure to protect data. The systems were not fully restored until 6 August 2021, however, complaint investigations were being dealt with as a priority.
2. It had escalated the complaint to the investigation stage of its complaints process and the resident should receive a full written response no later than 31 August 2021.
The landlord contacted the resident again on 18 August 2021. It agreed to arrange an inspection of the resident’s property, and agreed with the resident that the complaint would remain open until the outcome of the inspection.
The inspection was completed on 9 September 2021 and the following works were raised on a 21 day priority:
1. On 11 October 2021, a roofer to attend for a roofing inspection. A plumber to attend to remove the bath to allow access for joiner to investigate floor underneath bath for water damage.
2. On 21 October 2021, a plasterer to attend to hack off wall and skim in toilet. Plasterer to cut out and board ceiling, then skim full ceiling.
3. On 21 October 2021 and 25 October 2021, an electrician to attend to remove and refix light.
4. On 25 October 2021, a joiner to attend to remove and refit boxing to the downstairs toilet.
The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response on 7 October 2021. It said:
1. It apologised for the delay in completing the investigation.
2. Repairs were outstanding to the resident’s property both downstairs and in the bathroom, including the floor beneath the bath. There were also repairs required to the roof, which had caused issues with the bathroom ceiling.
3. There had been operatives sent out to the resident’s property who were from the wrong trades and unable to complete the works.
4. Arrangements were made for plastering to the bedroom ceiling on 8 June 2021, roof works to be completed on 9 June 2021 and the remaining plastering and plumbing work to be completed on 26 July 2021.
5. The complaint was escalated as the jobs were not completed. Further follow on works were raised, as the joists and floorboards needed to be replaced in the bathroom. The required plastering and tiling were postponed until the work had been done.
6. An inspection was arranged to progress the complaint. Following the inspection, works had been scheduled.
7. It was sorry that the service the resident had received fell below what should have been expected.
The landlord attended the resident’s property on 11 October 2021. Further follow on work was requested as the leak had still not been resolved. The comments on the follow on work request said, “the seal had gone around the bath and the joists needed changing but did not have time to do the job”. Further follow on work was also requested in relation to the roof inspection as scaffold was needed to the side of the property to point the ridge and refix any loose slates.
The resident contacted the landlord on 11 October 2021 to escalate the complaint to stage 2. The resident said that the plumber and joiner had attended that day and left them in the same position. Further follow up work had been raised to remove the bath and renew the floorboards. The resident said that they had been advised not to use the bath, only the shower, however this had been on-going for some time and each time an operative attended more follow up work was raised.
The landlord contacted the resident on 13 October 2021. It said that to progress the complaint to the next stage in its complaints process, the resident was required to choose from two options:
1. The complaint could be reviewed internally. The review would look at how the complaint had been investigated, and the decision made at the previous stage. A response would be provided within 10 working days.
2. It could hold a review panel meeting. The panel would consist of internal staff members together with two customers who were members of its scrutiny panel. The review panel would consider how the complaint had been investigated, review the decision at the previous stage and respond within 21 days. The resident would be invited to attend, via Zoom or a face to face meeting, to present the case to the panel with a family member or friend.
The landlord raised a job on 13 October 2021, with a target date of 19 October 2021, to remove the bath and replace the joist and floorboards. The landlord raised a further job on 19 October 2021 with a target date of 18 November 2021 for scaffolding to be erected to the side of the resident’s property to point the ridge and refix any loose slate.
An operative attended on 21 October 2021 and said there was not enough time to complete the required work. This was because the joiner was not on the job until midday, so there would not have been enough time to take out the bath, renew the flooring, and refit the bath. Further follow on work was requested and the landlord raised another job on 30 October 2021, with a target date of 16 November 2021, to remove the bath and replace the joist and floorboards.
The review panel meeting took place on 4 November 2021.
The landlord carried out a survey of the resident’s property on 10 November 2021. It found that the bath had dropped and was leaking due to rotten joists and floorboards. The ceiling and walls in the downstairs toilet had been badly damaged as a result. The landlord said that the following work was to be undertaken:
1. The asbestos team to test the vinyl floor tiles under the bath before any work could be carried out.
2. Day 1 – plasterer to remove water damaged ceiling in downstairs toilet and hack off any blown plaster to walls. Plumber to remove cistern for plasterer.
3. Days 2 and 3 – plumber and joiner to attend for full day to remove bath and shower screen; rip out rotten joists and renew floorboards under bath; refix bath, shower screen and bath panel and frame once joists and floor were complete.
4. Day 4 – plasterer to return and re-board and skim ceiling, and re-plaster damaged walls in downstairs toilet.
5. Day 5 – plumber to refix cistern in downstairs toilet.
The landlord spoke to the resident on 11 November 2021 and noted that they were happy to extend the outcome of the complaint until everything had been agreed following the outcome of the inspection.
The landlord completed a damp survey of the resident’s property on 16 November 2021.
The landlord attended the resident’s property on 24 November 2021 to erect scaffolding to the side of the property to point the ridge and refix any loose slate. The work was not completed. Follow on work was requested as it was determined that the job needed a fixed scaffold around the property, and two roofers for a full day to repoint the ridge and replace slates in various places.
The landlord raised damp repair works on 6 December 2021, with a target date for the work to be complete by 8 February 2022. The notes on the job stated that there was obvious timber decay underneath the bath where the waste fittings were. The inspector had checked both the bath and the sink, but there were no obvious signs of leakage to the waste fittings or the pipework at the time of inspection. The timbers were physically wet and were easily broken away by hand where bearing into the external wall. The bath needed to be removed alongside a section of the floor to investigate further and carry out timber repairs where necessary. There was also a defective section of ceiling where there was a presumed leak occurring through the roof coverings. The following work was raised:
1. Plumber to remove the bath and basin and set aside for later reinstatement. Inspect all plumbing elements for any leaks or defects, reinstate the bath and basin once the timber works and replastering to ceiling was finished.
2. Joiner to remove sections of floorboards to inspect joists. Renew floorboards once joists were fixed and in-situ.
3. Plasterer to remove and refix approx. 3 square metres of ceiling covering where defective, reboard and skim.
4. Fixed scaffold to be erected at rear elevation. Roofer to inspect the roof coverings for any potential defects and raise repairs as appropriate under high priority.
5. First floor toilet – there were severe efflorescent salts present to the internal wall. It was to check plumbing and pipework in the vicinity; strip out and apply membranes to the walls to stop the salts forming and any potential ingress; raise external brickwork checks where not visible from the ground at the time of inspection.
6. Plumber to remove the toilet and set aside for later reinstatement. Inspect the associated plumbing work for any leaks or defects. Reinstate toilet once all other works complete.
7. Plasterer to take off the skirting board. Hack off the left hand wall to full height, install wall membrane, float out and skim finish.
8. Joiner to refix the skirting board once plastering complete.
9. Erect a mobile tower up to first floor height and inspect the brickwork and mortar. Raise any required repairs under high priority.
10. Plasterers to remove the ceiling coverings to downstairs toilet, reboard and skim. Hack off the wall plaster where degraded, install wall membrane, float out and skim.
11. Plumber to remove the toilet and basin and refix upon plastering completion.
12. Tiler to remove and refix the tiles behind the toilet due to damp.
The landlord contacted the resident on 7 December 2021. It left a voicemail message to explain that it was waiting for the dates of the required work, and asked whether the resident would prefer the complaint response to be sent out without the dates, or when the dates had been booked in.
The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 complaint outcome letter on 22 December 2021, following the review panel meeting on 4 November 2021. It summarised the meeting and said:
1. The resident confirmed the outstanding repairs, which were:
  1. repair to the roof; crack in the ceiling in the upstairs bathroom; damp in the downstairs toilet; damage to the upstairs toilet; plasterwork; and a hole in the downstairs toilet that had been boarded since 2019.
2. The resident said that they had replastered the rooms downstairs themselves due to damp and confirmed that no damp inspection had been carried out by the landlord.
3. The issues had been investigated by multiple trade operatives but the work could not be completed as the plaster was wet.
4. The roof was re-inspected and an emergency repair had been carried out.
5. The work to replace the floorboards had not been completed. The resident had been advised not to use the bath, having previously been advised not to use the shower.
6. The panel felt that the investigation had not taken into account the length of time it had taken to identify the repairs that were needed and to carry them out. The panel also felt that the response did not recognise the circumstances this had left the resident and their family to live in. It apologised for this.
7. The panel were concerned to note that despite the complaint investigation advising of when the works would be completed, these had still not been done.
8. It understood that a damp inspection took place on 16 November 2021 and works were identified to the bathroom, the upstairs toilet, and the ground floor toilet. The contractor would contact the resident directly to arrange to complete the repairs.
9. The panel felt that a discretionary compensation payment of £450 should be awarded for the stress and inconvenience caused by the ongoing issues.
The resident contacted the landlord on 23 December 2021 as they were extremely dissatisfied with the way the stage 2 response had been handled. The resident said:
1. The panel meeting took place on 4 November 2021;however, they did not receive a response within the 28 daytime frame.
2. The proposed works were not suitable as the roof still needed to be repaired. The letter stated that the works to the roof had been completed, but they were still outstanding.
3. They were still waiting for the dates the works would be completed which was unacceptable.
4. The offer of £450 compensation was disgraceful as they had completed works themselves at their own expense as they did not want to live in poor conditions.
The damp repair works started on 2 February 2022. The landlord raised a further job on 14 February 2022, with a target date of 11 April 2022, for the works to the roof. The landlord attended to complete the roof works on 28 February 2022 but follow on work was requested due to bad weather. The job was re-scheduled for the 4 March 2022 and was completed.
Following a discussion with the landlord on 11 April 2022, the resident emailed a list of the works that were still outstanding. These were:
1. Bathroom: tile; box in pipes under the sink; refix bath panel; fit extractor fan; put light up correctly; remove old tiles and replace with new tiles.
2. Upstairs toilet: tile and refit toilet.
3. Downstairs toilet: Take walls and ceiling back to brick due to water damage and black mould; remove toilet, tiles, boxing in and plaster; fit moisture resistant membrane under plaster board; plaster; fit new light fitting; tile; and refit toilet.
4. Check gas and electric meter cupboard to ensure safety due to water damage.
The landlord carried out an inspection of the resident’s property on 12 April 2022 and completed a ‘client approval form’ which gave a description of the required follow on work:
1. Joiner to provide new boxing into pipework underneath the hand basin.
2. Electrician to renew the mechanical wall extractor fan and refix the internal light fitting.
3. Plumber to renew the upstairs WC with a new closed coupled unit.
4. Tiler to hack off remaining section of wall tiles in bathroom, supply and install new glazed tiles to the bathroom and toilet room.
The landlord’s records show the damp repair works as complete on 28 June 2022. A post inspection was carried out on 14 July 2022 and the following repairs were identified as outstanding, with a target date of 21 July 2022:
1. Reinstate sink, renew skirtings, architraves and 2 internal doors in the downstairs toilet.
2. Rehang radiator.
3. Refit toilet cistern and renew skirting boards in upstairs toilet.
4. Refit shower and shower screen in bathroom.
Following the post inspection, a further compensation payment of £1500 was agreed with the resident for the delays and upset caused.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of remedial repairs to the resident’s roof, bathroom and downstairs toilet

In addition to its obligations under s11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (the Act), s9A of the Act implies a statutory obligation on the landlord to ensure that the resident’s property is fit for human habitation at the start of the tenancy, and throughout the term. Fitness for human habitation is measured by the condition of the property in relation to the matters specified in s10 LTA 1985. Freedom from damp is listed within the Act.
The landlord must also ensure that the homes it provides meet the Decent Homes Standard (the standard). Section 5 of the standard says that landlords must ensure that its properties are free of category one hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) and the existence of such hazards should be a trigger for remedial action. Damp and mould are listed as potential hazards.
It should be noted that the landlord has advised this service that its processes have changed in relation to the delivery of multi trade repairs and follow on repairs following customer feedback. The landlord said that the changes ensure closer planning of works, smoother delivery, and more effective communication with residents. One of the changes made is that the customer is given the next appointment for any follow on work before the operative leaves site.
It is not disputed that there has been a significant and ongoing leak into the resident’s property from the roof, which has caused considerable damage, damp, and mould to the bathroom, toilet, and downstairs toilet. The landlord has sought to comply with its repairing obligations by raising various repair jobs for its contractors to complete. However, these actions have failed to remedy the problem and, as a result, the resident and their family continued to live with damp and mould for around 18 months.
The resident reported the cracked ceiling and leak above the bath in December 2020. They were entitled to expect that the property would be repaired within a reasonable period. As the issue continued, and worsened, over the 18 month period, it is clear that the landlord failed to remedy the problem within a reasonable timescale, even though it took some steps to try to resolve the issue. This left the resident and their family living in an unpleasant and difficult situation for an unreasonable period of time.
The landlord attended the resident’s property on four separate occasions between 15 December 2020 and 28 May 2021, however no work was carried out. On each occasion, the operative in attendance only requested follow on work for a different trade to attend to complete work. It is unclear form the information provided why this happened on four separate occasions, and why the landlord did not appear to be aware of this.
The resident informed the landlord on 28 May 2021 that there was black mould and mushrooms growing in the property. The landlord’s response under its ‘informal’ complaints stage was to confirm dates for the various required works. The bathroom works were already booked in for 16 August 2021, which were almost 3 months from the date of the resident’s complaint, and 8 months from the report of the repair. This shows that the landlord failed to recognise the urgency of the situation and the significance of the presence of mould and mushrooms within the resident’s home. It also failed to recognise the potential impact of the mould and mushrooms on the resident and their family, which was unreasonable.
The landlord attended the resident’s property in July 2021 to complete the plumbing and plastering works. Again, the operative did not complete any work and raised follow on work for a different trade. It was only after the resident had escalated the complaint to stage 1 on 2 August 2021 that the landlord agreed to complete a property inspection. This is further evidence that the landlord did not demonstrate any urgency in rectifying the situation, as the inspection was arranged for 9 September 2021 and the required work was arranged for between 11 and 25 October 2021. Given the length of time the resident had already waited, this was unreasonable.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord recognised that the wrong trades had attended the resident’s property and the work was not complete. The landlord apologised for its failings, however, it failed to provide a resolution and failed to offer any redress to the resident.
The landlord did carry out a survey of the property on 10 November 2021 which identified exactly what work needed to be completed, however this was almost 12 months after the initial report. It is unclear from the evidence provided why a survey was arranged in November 2021 when an inspection had already taken place on 9 September 2021. It is also unclear as to why the repairs identified during the survey were not raised until 6 December 2021, with an expected completion date of 8 February 2022. This is further evidence of the landlord’s disregard for the resident’s circumstances and demonstrates the lack of urgency shown by it.
The review panel did acknowledge that there were issues with the stage 1 investigation into the resident’s complaint. It also acknowledged that the stage 1 response did not recognise the circumstances that the resident and family were living in. It apologised for the landlord’s failings and offered £450 compensation. A further £1,500 compensation was agreed with the resident following the post inspection of the works in July 2022.
Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by it put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In this case, the landlord attempted to put things right by apologising to the resident and by increasing the compensation offer (following the post inspection) in view of the further delays and upset caused to the resident.
The landlord’s revised offer of £1,950 compensation and its apology represented reasonable redress for the identified failings, and in the Ombudsman’s opinion, the landlord has been able to evidence it made reasonable and proactive efforts to resolve the complaints and “put things right” in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
In summary, although there were significant failings in the handling of repairs, the landlord attempted to put things right following the post inspection in July 2022. The redress offered by the landlord was reasonable in the circumstances, and in line with the remedies guidance provided by the Ombudsman for cases where there was a failure which had a significant impact on the resident. The landlord is therefore to pay the £1,950 compensation offered, if it has not already done so. The finding of reasonable redress is dependent on the compensation being paid.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

It should be noted that the landlord has reviewed its complaints policy and procedure since it dealt with this complaint. The landlord now operates a 2 stage complaints process which is compliant with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. This case, however, will be investigated considering the policy and procedure in place at the time.
There were failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. The resident escalated the complaint to stage 1 on 2 August 2021. The landlord did not acknowledge the escalation request until 16 August 2021, although the landlord said that this was due to a cyber security incident on 26 July 2021, which was not resolved until 6 August 2021.
However, taking into consideration the security incident, and the agreement with the resident on 18 August 2021 to delay the response until the outcome of the inspection, the landlord still failed to provide a stage 1 response until 7 October 2021. This was almost a month after the date of the inspection on 9 September 2021, which was unreasonable.
In addition to the delay, the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code in place at the time said, “A complaint should be resolved at the earliest possible opportunity”. The landlord failed to comply with this requirement as the delays to allow for the inspection to take place did not appear to add any benefit to the stage 1 response. It merely prolonged the overall process for the resident.
The review panel took place 4 November 2021, and the outcome should have been given to the resident by 11 November 2021. The landlord again agreed with the resident to delay the outcome until the date of the works had been agreed. This meant that the resident did not receive the review panel outcome until 22 December 2021, which was 34 working days from the date of the review panel instead of the published timeframe of 5 working days.
Again, this was an unreasonable approach and only prolonged the outcome of the stage 2 response. There was no obvious benefit to the resident in suspending a response and the unnecessary and unreasonable delays would likely have contributed to their overall frustration. The landlord also failed to recognise its complaint handling failures and did not offer any redress for these.
In summary, there were failings in the landlord’s complaint handling, which would have caused the resident additional time and trouble, frustration and distress. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaints policy and delayed unreasonably in providing its responses at both stage 1 and stage 2.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord for the service failures identified in its handling of remedial repairs to the resident’s roof, bathroom and downstairs toilet.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord’s complaint response following its review panel and additional offer of compensation following the post inspection recognised its failings and apologised to the resident for its handling of the repairs. The overall offer of £1,950 compensation was fair, reasonable, and in line with Housing Ombudsman guidance.
The landlord’s complaint handling was poor, and it departed from the timescales set out in its complaints policy. There were unnecessary delays in the landlord issuing both its stage one and stage two complaint responses. The landlord also failed to adequately recognise its complaint handling failures and did not offer any redress.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within four weeks from the date of this report, the landlord must:
1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failures highlighted in this report.
2. Pay the resident compensation of £175 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the associated complaint.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance within the timescales set out above.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord should:
1. Pay the resident the £1,950 compensation it offered, if it has not already done so.
2. Update the resident, and this service, on the specific improvements made to its processes in relation to the delivery of multi trade repairs and follow on repairs, and explain how the improvements will ensure that the issues encountered by the resident will not happen again.
The landlord should reply to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report to advise of its intentions in regard to the above recommendations.