Wandle Housing Association Limited (202212795)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202212795

Wandle Housing Association Limited

29 January 2024

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 landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs.
The landlord’s record keeping has also been investigated.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord, which is a housing association. The tenancy began on 26 May 2000.
The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on an unknown date. The landlord said within its stage 1 response that the complaint was regarding the number of outstanding repairs within the property and lack of communication from the landlord.
On 27 January 2022 the landlord provided a stage 1 response which addressed a total of 11 outstanding repairs. The response said that while some of the repairs had previously been reported, a number of repairs were new. The response provided the resident with details of the orders that had been raised and that the relevant team would be in touch to book an appointment. It upheld the complaint on the basis that the resident had not been kept up to date regarding the repairs the landlord was aware of.
On an unknown date the resident escalated their complaint to stage 2, which the landlord acknowledged on 30 May 2022. The landlord’s stage 2 response said that the resident escalated their complaint because of a number of outstanding repairs, some of which were different to those raised at stage 1.
On 24 June 2022 the landlord provided its final response, which said:
1. It had checked its internal records system and could not see that all the orders had been raised and that it had acted within its policies and standard processes.
2. As a resolution, the landlord had arranged to visit the resident on 30 June 2022 to inspect the property and raise any repairs identified.
On 13 September 2022 the resident contacted the landlord and the Ombudsman stating that they had previously had the shower room repaired but the tiles had come loose and the extractor fan did not turn off. They said it had been reported 4 weeks ago, but they had not heard anything from the landlord. It was also reported that there were issues with drafty front door and windows.
On 22 September 2022 the landlord responded to the resident and confirmed that an appointment had been made for the windows and doors to be looked at, and the floorboards had been referred to a subcontractor. The carpet also needed to be removed and an urgent chaser email had been sent.
On 6 October 2022 the Ombudsman contacted the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint that he sent on 13 September 2022. The landlord confirmed that these issues had been addressed via its final response dated 24 June 2022.
On 8 April 2023 the resident confirmed to the Ombudsman that a number of repairs remained outstanding. On 11 July 2023 the landlord informed the Ombudsman that since the resident made their complaint, it had attended the property on 30 June 2022 and had sealed the doors and windows in October 2022, the extractor fan was also attended to in the same month. It had further inspected the flooring repair in December 2022 in order to meet with the resident’s satisfaction of it.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s approach.

The Ombudsman’s role is to determine complaints by reference to what is fair in all the circumstances and decide if the landlord is responsible for maladministration or service failure.
When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes
2. Put things right, and
3. Learn from outcomes.

Scope of Investigation

The purpose of the complaint process is to resolve the complaint at the earliest opportunity. Residents are encouraged to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues and reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As issues become historic, it becomes increasingly difficult to unpick the events that took place and how matters were handled.
In accordance with paragraph 42(c), the Ombudsman is unable to consider complaints about matters which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 6 months of the matters arising. In this case, the resident says that they have been experiencing issues with the repairs within the property for over 4 years, but there are no records to show that a formal complaint was raised with the landlord until 2022. Furthermore, if a complaint had been raised and exhausted the internal complaint process, it had not been referred to the Ombudsman.
Consequently, this investigation will focus on matters which occurred on or after January 2022, but may consider the wider implication of historic repairs in the context of the handling of more recent issues.

Policies and procedures

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a legal duty on landlords to make full, effective and lasting repairs once it is given notice of disrepair. They must keep in repair and working order, the installations for the supply of gas and electricity, water and sanitation and space heating and heating water. The resident’s tenancy agreement should also reflect these obligations; however the landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with a copy.
The landlord’s policies are located on its website, including its complaint and repairs policy. The complaints policy states that the landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Stage 1 complaints will be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response will be provided within 10 working days. The policy also confirms that a resident can escalate their complaint within a reasonable timeframe, normally 2 months, and responses will be provided within 20 working days.
The repairs policy states that the landlord is responsible for the repair and maintenance of multiple components, which includes windows, doors and internal structural floor. It classifies repairs as either an emergency or an appointable repair, and these will be completed within 28 days.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs.

As detailed in the scope of the investigation the resident states that a number of outstanding repairs have been outstanding for a number of years, and while the investigation will not focus on the handling of these, it is important to review the information provided by the landlord. The investigation has focused on the repairs which were detailed within the stage 1 and 2 responses.
The landlord provided the Service with the repair history for the property which detailed a number of orders that had been raised, this included issues with the tiling in the bathroom, issues with the floorboards and windows. These had previously been reported to the landlord in 2018/19. The records are limited, with some repairs having an associated job sheet completed detailing the work, which was carried out, and other entries which only confirm a completion date.
The repair records also show that issues with the floorboards, tiles within the bathroom and the front door were raised in the later part of 2021. It is not clear whether this was because they remained outstanding from 2019, or whether the resident delayed in reporting them due to the Covid-19 Government restrictions which were imposed in 2020 and 2021. Again, the records are limited and only give a completion date is recorded for each repair.
The landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with a copy of the resident’s initial complaint, so it is not clear what specific issues were brought to the landlord’s attention and when. However, the stage 1 response, dated 27 January 2022, stated that the resident’s complaint was about a number of outstanding complaints and gave a comprehensive response detailing which repairs were outstanding and what action had been taken. It also detailed what repairs had not been reported but confirmed that it had raised the orders accordingly.
The landlord’s repair records support the landlord’s position and also show that it appropriately raised the newly reported repairs for the resident on the same date as the stage 1 response. These actions demonstrate that the landlord was actively trying to resolve the resident’s complaint and provided him with a comprehensive response.
However, there is no evidence to show that the landlord kept the resident up to date with regards to the progress of the repair and while it is unclear what the grounds for the resident’s stage 2 escalation were, it is reasonable to conclude that the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of the outstanding repairs. This is further evidenced by the resident contacting the landlord again in September 2022 to make raise a new complaint.
The landlord’s stage 2 response, dated 24 June 2022, again stated that not all of the repairs had been raised by the resident and that it had acted within its policies and procedures. In order to resolve the resident’s complaint, it had arranged to inspect the resident’s property and raise any works that were identified.
While the steps the landlord took were reasonable and proportionate given that the repairs had not been identified as outstanding, there is little information to support the landlord’s position that it had acted within its policies and procedures, nor whether the communication had been fair and reasonable. Furthermore, the landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with details of the outcome of the inspection carried out in June 2022.
While the Ombudsman acknowledges the distress, frustration and inconvenience the resident said that they experienced as a result of the landlord’s actions, the lack of concise information provided to the Service makes it difficult for the Ombudsman to fully determine what has happened.
The landlord has failed to provide copies of any information relating to the resident’s contact with the landlord, nor has it provided copies of any information that shows that it was actively monitoring the repairs in order to ensure the residents complaint was resolved.
The Ombudsman would expect to see a copy of the inspection report from June 2022, copies of any communication between the relevant investigating manager, repairs team and resident, along with post completion reports, and if necessary, a post inspection report to confirm works have been completed.
As the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and informed the Ombudsman on 18 April 2023 that a number of repairs remain outstanding, it is reasonable to conclude that the landlord did not have a robust process in place to ensure that the repairs were completed.
There is also information to show that the repairs to the floorboards remained outstanding for a number of months. While the landlord’s stage 1 response said that it had raised the issue to its subcontractors, who would be in touch within 28 days, there is evidence that the issue was still outstanding in December 2022.
The landlord’s records show that a separate complaint was raised in approximately August 2022, which related to the floorboards. This suggests that the issue was still outstanding which the resident cause to complain. There is also evidence that a repair raised on 13 December 2022 identified that there were still some issues, which had been referred to a supervisor. It is not clear what the issues were or what steps the landlord took once it was notified of this.
While some repairs require additional investigation, it is not reasonable for the resident to still be experiencing issues nearly 12 months after the issue was raised as part of the stage 1 in approximately January 2022. It is also significantly outside of the 28 days as detailed within its repairs policy and will attract a level of compensation.
The Ombudsman is clear that landlords should use the complaints process as an opportunity to learn from its outcomes and treat residents fairly. As a result of the landlord failing to address the resident’s request for a repair within a reasonable timeframe, which led to the resident having to make a further complaint, it is now for the Ombudsman to decide what orders should be made to put things right.
30. The Ombudsman has considered the distress and inconvenience suffered by the resident as a result of the delay in addressing the request for a repair within a reasonable timeframe. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance, where there has been a failure which had an adverse impact on the resident, a payment of above £100 is recommended. In recognition of the significant period of time the resident has not received any update or repairs, the Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £450 compensation for the distress and inconvenience incurred.
Further orders have also been made at the end of this determination in relation to the report of outstanding repairs.
In summary, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs, due to its failure to take steps to ensure the repairs were completed within a reasonable timeframe.

The landlord’s record keeping.

As outlined above, it is concerning that the landlord has not been able to provide the Ombudsman with evidence of the resident’s contacts with the landlord, along with a detailed repair history, internal communication, inspection reports and full complaint communication records.
This Service requested information from the landlord to evidence the way in which it handled the resident’s repairs, and complaint including:
1. All internal correspondence and telephone contact notes concerning the resident’s repair reports. Copies of any survey or inspection reports, or feedback from other employees or contractors
2. The resident’s original complaint, escalation requests and the landlord’s responses at each stage of its complaint procedure.
3. And any other contact notes, correspondence, internal emails or call records relating to the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
The Ombudsman has received very little information from the landlord, which indicates the landlord either does not hold these records or is unable to retrieve them. The Service would expect all contact to be recorded on the landlord’s system, to ensure there is an audit trail for any future issues that are raised. The landlord provided the resident with a brief response in it’s complaint responses the landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with any evidence to support its position.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management states that “good knowledge and information management is crucial to any organisation’s ability to perform and achieve its mission…If information is not created correctly, it has less integrity and cannot be relied on. This can be either a complete absence of information, or inaccurate and partial information… The failings to create and record information accurately results in landlords not taking appropriate and timely action, missing opportunities to identify that actions were wrong or inadequate, and contributing to inadequate communication and redress. Incorrect information can also cause real detriment…[and] contribute to an increased risk to a resident’s health and safety…[Vulnerabilities] may also mean that reasonable adjustments are appropriate to actively prevent harm or distress.”
The Report therefore recommends that landlords take steps to improve their knowledge and information management, including by implementing a strategy for this, benchmarking against other organisations’ good practice, reviewing internal guidance around recording vulnerabilities, and carrying out appropriate staff training. It is of concern that there is no indication that the landlord has taken such steps to do so in light of its poor record keeping in the resident’s case, as outlined above.
The landlord has also been recommended to take steps to learn from the outcome of the resident’s case by reviewing its record keeping practices in relation to inspections, repairs and residents’ vulnerabilities, including in light of the findings of this report and the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management.
Furthermore, given the level of detriment to the resident regarding the landlord’s record keeping, the Ombudsman has also determined that compensation is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. In line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies where there has been service failure with no permanent impact, payments of above £100 are recommended. Therefore, the landlord has been ordered to pay the £150 compensation.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs.

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered to write to the resident and apologise for the findings in this report.
The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £600 compensation, within 4 weeks of the date of this determination. The compensation is made up of:
1. £450 for the failure to ensure repairs were completed within a reasonable timeframe.
2. £150 for its failure to with its information management.
The landlord is ordered to carry out a post inspection of the resident’s property within 2 weeks of the date this report and ensure that there are no outstanding repairs. If any repairs are identified, then the resident and the Ombudsman should be provided with a schedule of works within 2 weeks after the date of the inspection.
The landlord is ordered to review its record keeping practices, to ensure that accurate and accessible records are kept and maintained. As part of its review, the landlord should consider whether a record management policy and staff training are required. The landlord should write to the Ombudsman confirming this has been completed and detailing the outcome within 6 weeks of the date of this determination.
It is recommended that the landlord produces a suitable procedure to ensure that the any learning or actions are completed within a reasonable timeframe. It is also recommended that it is also includes steps which ensure residents are kept informed with the progress.