Sanctuary Housing Association (202224742)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202224742

Sanctuary Housing Association

5 February 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 complains is about the landlord’s:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of repairs in the property.
2. Complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy agreement with the landlord that started in 2014. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The resident suffers from mental health issues. She lives in the property with her 3 children.
The tenancy agreement says that the landlord shall maintain and keep in proper working order, among other things, the following:
1. The structure and outside of the property (including the roof, outside walls and outside doors, window frames, window sills, drains gutter and external pipes but not including any garden fences).
2. Internal walls, floors and ceilings, major internal plasterwork.
3. Installations for the supply of gas, electricity, water and sanitation.
4. Heating and water heating equipment.
The landlord’s repairs handbook says that it has 3 repair categories:
1. Emergency repairs which will be made safe within 24 hours. These repairs are those that need to be done because there is a serious health and safety threat to people living in or near the property or a risk of serious damage to the property itself.
2. Appointed repairs which will be carried out within 28 calendar days. These are responsive repairs that are not emergencies.
3. Planned repairs which are carried out as a programme of works. Some maintenance works might take longer than 28 days, for example where there is no health and safety risk, and the required work does not disrupt the quality of the resident’s life.
From November 2020 the landlord had a 2-stage complaints procedure. It said that the first stage focused on front line staff taking swift action to resolve customers’ concerns effectively and providing a written response within ten working days (a front line resolution response). It explained that the second stage, investigation, focused on providing an independent investigation into customer concerns and providing a full written report of their findings within 20 working days of the resident asking for an escalation of their complaint.
The landlord introduced a revised complaints procedure in September 2022. This was also a 2-stage complaints procedure with the same timescales. This said that, where investigations are more complex or need a longer timeframe to provide a customer with a full response, it may extend the timeframe to respond to the complaint at either stage by 10 working days.
The landlord’s compensation guidance says that it can offer compensation for things such as time, trouble and inconvenience due to its action or inaction; delayed or poor responses to customers’ complaints; and lack of, or unreasonable delay to, the provision of services.
The guidance says the landlord can make payments up to the value of £400 in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience of a service failure. £400 is the highest sum recognised for “high effort” and “high impact”. It says that for poor complaint handling, payments of up to £150 may be made in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience. It adds that £10 can be paid for a missed appointment. The guidance says that, when considering compensation, the landlord will consider the vulnerabilities of the household.

Summary of events

In November 2019 the resident reported that the sill of the porch window had broken off. The landlord sealed the window the following month and noted “the porch is in very bad state.”
On 27 February 2020 the resident reported a broken fence that was falling into the neighbour’s garden. The landlord subsequently noted it had responsibility for this; and that 4 posts and 7 metres of fencing were required, and the work should be completed by 5 March 2020.
On 28 July 2020 the resident told the landlord that the roof works had been completed (following reports of damp) but the internal works remained outstanding. The landlord noted that, at the last inspection, it had to wash down and stain block ceilings and walls in the property on the staircase and landing, in the bathroom and bedroom. It noted these works should be carried out “when it was safe to do so”.
On 18 November 2020 a surveyor inspected the property and noted 14 repairs should be raised including:
1. Fix loose floorboards and replace damaged ones.
2. Repair plaster to the walls of the small front bedroom.
3. Kitchen ceiling repair.
4. Porch window/door replacement.
On 23 November 2020 the landlord noted that the boundary fence should be renewed on both sides of the front garden of the property. It noted the current fences were “rotten and beyond repair”.
On 20 December 2020 the resident reported a large hole in the downpipe that was discharging waste water straight back into the property. She said the landlord had tried to fix this twice previously without success. A contractor attended and sent an estimate to the landlord on 10 January 2021.
On 5 January 2021 the resident made a complaint to the landlord about its handling of various repairs at the property. She said “I cannot see this house as a home. She said her children could not have friends round and she felt “ashamed” of the property; she added that had “had enough.”
On the same day the landlord noted it should inspect the property for a number of issues raised in the complaint including the floorboards which had been described by the resident as “loose and dangerous”; there was no plaster on one of the bedroom walls; the windows needed replacement as they had blown; the roof on the back room was “damp and collapsing” due to an inaccessible downpipe which was leaking; wood in the porch and back room were rotting; and almost all the fence panels were broken and had fallen down.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint that day also. It said it should hear from a complaint co-ordinator within ten working days and it would provide a written response within ten days after that.
On 6 January 2021 the landlord noted that, following a call from the resident about the fence, it should confirm the number of panels that required replacement. It later noted that the work raised was to replace all fence panels in the front garden on both sides and that no work should be done in the rear garden as that would be done but at a later date.
On 8 January 2021 the resident questioned why the landlord was replacing the front fence panels and not the rear ones.
On 12 January 2021 the landlord told the resident that it would bring forward the appointment for the floorboard repairs.
On 18 January 2021 the landlord gave the resident an update on the repairs:
1. The fence was with its contractor, and it would continue to chase for a repair date.
2. The plastering was booked for 4 March 2021.
3. It had chased its planning team for an update on the porch.
4. A quote had been received for the downpipe and had been sent for authorisation.
The landlord said, when a complaint was made, it could only go back up to 6 months. It said she would have to report the following to the repairs team: damp, floorboards, windows and unsafe roof.
On the same day the landlord told the resident that it was only responding to emergency repairs at that time.
On 19 January 2021 the landlord’s operative noted that the front porch should be replaced.
On 10 March 2021 the landlord noted that it should attend and fix down exposed loose floorboards and replace broken floorboards where needed around the property.
On 25 March 2021 the landlord carried out some repairs to the property including repairing floorboards, ceiling repairs to the kitchen and filling holes in the bedroom walls.
On 19 April 2021 further work was completed to the plaster in the small front bedroom as the resident had been unhappy with the quality of the previous work.
On 30 June 2021 the landlord issued a second front line resolution response. The main points were:
1. The resident had reported the bedroom needing re-plastering on 2 November 2020. It arranged for an operative to attend on 30 November 2020. Works were arranged 12 January 2021 but subsequently moved to 4 March then 14 April 2021.
2. The resident had reported a fence repair on 23 November 2020. Following an inspection on 30 November 2020, works were issued to its contractor to replace it. It understood the fence was broken and it had asked its surveyor to assess the fence during their visit.
3. The resident had reported a problem with the downpipe on 21 December 2020, Works were identified and, following their approval, the works were issued to its contractors on 5 February 2021. It said it trusted the works had been completed satisfactorily.
4. In relation to the porch, its contractors were due to attend on 25 March 2021, but this was cancelled. Following approval of the quotation, works were issued to the contractors on 31 March 2021. It understood that, when a date had been scheduled for the works to commence, the resident would be contacted.
5. The issue with the floorboards had been resolved.
6. It could not see that any works had been arranged for the windows and the back room. It had asked its surveyor to inspect these during the visit and to report back on the works required.
The landlord said that the length of time taken to complete these repairs and the action that was taken to keep the resident informed was longer than expected. It said that it had made its maintenance team aware that in situations where work was delayed, it needed to improve communication with its customers to prevent similar complaints in the future.
Due to the inconvenience, time and trouble, the landlord offered the resident £260 as a way of saying sorry for the experience she had had. This was made up of £200 for time, trouble and inconvenience; £10 for the missed appointment (relating to a boiler repair); and £50 for the length of time the complaint had been open. It explained how the resident could escalate the complaint.
On 15 July 2021 the resident asked for the complaint to be escalated.
On 27 July 2021 the landlord inspected the property and made a list of the repairs required relating to the outbuilding, kitchen, rear bedroom, main bedroom, front porch and exterior. It said that all windows should be reviewed for defective seals.
On 9 August 2021 the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response under its formal complaints procedure. The main points were:
1. It apologised for the delay in completing repairs to the following: plastering; boiler/radiator; downpipe; fence; porch; windows; back room; and floorboards. It said that, while COVID-19 restrictions had had an impact on these repairs, it had taken longer than it would expect to clarify what the issues were and to arrange an appropriate remedy. It also felt its communication with the resident could have been better.
2. It had inspected the property on 27 July 2021, and it would consider compensation once the repairs had been carried out. It proposed that it wrote to the resident within 20 working days of the inspection report being completed to explain the findings and the proposed resolution, and also to make a formal offer of compensation to her.
The landlord explained how the resident could contact it if she was unhappy with that response.
On 24 September 2021 the porch was replaced.
On 15 October 2021 the landlord spoke to the resident who said that there were many repairs outstanding and gave details. The landlord noted that it should call her with an update on the repairs that day and with regular updates until they were completed.
On 31 October 2021 the landlord asked its repairs team to insect the porch and fence at the property as it needed to know the exact repairs required.
On 16 November 2021 the landlord noted that its surveyor had advised there were “a lot of finishing touches that haven’t been done, nothing too major” and he had would need to look at the quote from the contractors to see how it would proceed.
On 10 December 2021 the landlord noted that the resident had put her foot through the floor of one of the children’s bedroom and that was a health and safety risk. It noted this work to make the floor safe was completed the same day and the landlord sent details to its insurer.
On 14 February 2022 the landlord noted that the replacement of the window sills for the porch was not included in the original quote. This was subsequently booked for a repair on 7 April 2022.
On 29 April 2022 the landlord accepted the resident’s emails of 22 and 29 April 2022 as a request to escalate the complaint.
On 16 May 2022 the landlord issued its final complaint response under its formal complaint procedures. The main points were:
1. It was clear from a review of its records that following the resident’s report of the repairs since July 2020, she had experienced delays and disruption in relation to those issues. It was clear it should have managed that better and it apologised for the impact this had had on her.
2. While some delays were due to the lockdown, some delays were due to contractors not being able to attend; numerous visits; different contractors attending; delays receiving the quotation of works; delays with works being approved; and works left unfinished to the porch.
3. It assured the resident that its findings had been fed back to all teams involved to ensure that they were able to take action to prevent this happening again. It had asked that:
  1. Contractor’s inspections and quotations were carefully monitored by the surveyor allocated to assess potential works so customers were updated.
  2. Staff within its customer service centre recognised the importance of understanding repairs which were urgent and took ownership of them.
  3. With respect to incomplete repairs from its contractor, it had asked that its findings were discussed in the next contractor performance review to ensure they were reminded of the importance to fulfil all repairs which were stated on the order.
  4. That the urgency of the repair was taken into consideration and any quotations were authorised outside of the normal internal processes.
4. It apologised that its communication with the resident should have been better and noted she was not actively contacted with updates in relation to the repairs which meant she had to call in for information.
5. The majority of the repairs had been completed. An order had been raised for its contractor to carry out the outstanding repairs to the outbuilding, kitchen and front bedroom as well as check the windows for defective seals. That order had been raised in April 2022; however, the contractor had said they had not received it. The landlord had re-sent the work order and would confirm receipt with the contractor urgently. It apologised for the delay.
It offered the resident a goodwill gesture which covered the period up to 31 August 2022. It said, if there was any further delay, that would be considered separately. The landlord offered £1,010 made up of the following:
1. £260 offered in the stage 1 response made up of £200 for time, trouble and inconvenience; £10 for a missed appointment; and £50 for the length of time the complaint had been open.
2. £150 for the delay in sending the final response.
3. £100 as an additional payment towards the length of time the complaint had been on-going.
4. £200 as an additional payment towards time and trouble caused. (It had offered £400 which was the maximum that could be offered in line with its compensation guidance)
5. £100 as a future offer for the four repairs recently re-raised to its contractor (which it was aiming to complete by the end of August 2022).
6. £200 as an additional payment for the further impact with respect to the complaint.
The landlord signposted the resident to the Ombudsman.
On 18 July 2023 the landlord noted that follow-on works for the fence were never raised, and an order was raised.
In August 2023 the landlord gave an update on the outstanding repairs – the downpipe had been raised for repair and was being monitored through to completion; and repairs to the back door had been scheduled to be completed on 29 September 2023. It said an appointment had been booked to complete the repairs to the porch door on 18 August 2023 and an appointment booked for 15 August 2023 to complete repairs and a reassessment for the damp works at the property. Repairs for the fence were currently with its planning team who would be contacting the customer to schedule an appointment.
The repairs log evidences that the downpipe was replaced on 10 August 2023.
In January 2024 the landlord told us that the fence repairs were completed on 16 January 2024.
When the resident approached the Ombudsman, she said she had done so because she wanted the repairs completed. She confirmed that they were now complete apart from one window that was not part of the repairs relating to this complaint and that it was due to be replaced later this month. She said that not all the repairs had been completed by the end of August 2022 and the fence repair was only completed a couple of weeks ago. The resident said it had been a very stressful period for her and her family and she could now “make the property a home” for her and her children.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs in the property

In its complaint handling the landlord acknowledged that its response to the resident’s reports of the repairs fell short of the standard expected. It acknowledged its response including multiple visits to the property; contractors not being able to attend; different contractors being involved; delays receiving quotations for the works; delays with the works being approved; and works left unfinished. It added that the lockdown had also been a factor in its ability to respond. The landlord’s handling of the repairs was not appropriate because it did not complete them in line with the timescales set out in its repair policy. While the pandemic lockdowns had an impact on the landlord’s ability to carry out appointed repairs, the delays in this case were significant and its communication with the resident about the repairs was poor despite its assurances.
The landlord set out the action it would take to ensure these failings did not happen again which demonstrated its commitment to improving the service it gave. The landlord also apologised and offered compensation to the resident.
In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
The landlord offered the resident compensation of £800 for the delay in carrying out the repairs (plus £10 for a missed appointment) which covered the period to the end of August 2022. The repair log evidenced the time the landlord took to carry out these repairs:
1. Replastering of the bedroom – reported on 2 November 2020 and confirmed by inspection later that month; completed 14 April 2021.
2. The fence initially reported 27 February 2020 and confirmed as beyond repair in November 2020 after an inspection. Full replacement completed in January 2024.
3. The floorboards noted as requiring work in November 2020 after inspection and repairs completed in March 2021; however, we note further work in December 2021.
4. The porch was noted as being in a “bad state” in 2019 and works noted in November 2020 after inspection. Works were carried out in September 2021 but not completed until April 2022.
5. Downpipe repair reported in November 2020 and replaced in August 2023.
The Ombudsman recognises that some of our residents’ circumstances mean that they are more affected by landlords’ actions or inactions than others. While we cannot assess the extent to which a landlord’s maladministration has contributed to or exacerbated a resident’s physical and/or mental health, wherever appropriate, we will seek to recognise these circumstances in the remedies we set out. We consider that there were aggravating factors here – the resident’s mental health and her young children.
While the landlord offered compensation in its final complaint response, there is no evidence that the landlord considered additional compensation for delay to repairs after August 2022. The evidence demonstrates that it was decided to replace the damaged downpipe which took place in August 2023; the porch door repair also took place in August 2023 (further delays of 12 months); the back door repair took place at the end of September 2023 (further delay of 13 months); and the fence repair were completed in January 2024 (further delay of 17 months).
We consider that further financial compensation of £850 is appropriate in this case as follows:
1. £15 a month for the impact of the delay for fully resolving the problem with the downpipe (£180).
2. £20 a month for the impact of the delay in the porch door repair (£240).
3. £20 a month for the impact of the delay in the back door repair (£260).
4. £10 a month for the impact of the fence repair (£170).
This brings the total compensation for the impact of the delays repairs to £1,650 which we consider to be proportionate, and which takes into account the vulnerabilities of the resident and her family.
The update from the landlord to us in August 2023 said that a reassessment for the damp works at the property would also take place. The landlord did not consider the issue of the damp repairs in its complaint handling; however, the evidence suggests that these repairs were outstanding from at least mid-2020 to August 2023. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to consider compensation for the distress, inconvenience and frustration caused to the resident by this delay.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s handling of the complaint was not appropriate. It issued two front line resolution responses in January and June 2021; the first of which did not include details of how the resident could escalate the complaint if she remained dissatisfied. When the resident requested an escalation in July 2021, a stage 1 response was issued the following month. In line with its complaint procedures, by that time a final response should have been issued. That was a service failing.
When the resident first approached the landlord, it said it would not consider all the issues she had raised as it said it could only look at issues raised in the previous 6 months and asked her to report these matters. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have raised these issues itself as repairs, rather than ask the resident to do so.
In its complaint handling, the landlord offered the resident £200for the impact of its complaint handling failures. We consider that a proportionate sum for the time and trouble caused to the resident as well as the inconvenience caused to her by the delays.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s reports of repairs in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord has made redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint with respect to its complaint handling.

Reasons

The landlord acknowledged that its handling of the repairs was not appropriate, despite the impact of the pandemic lockdowns. It also acknowledged its poor communication. It offered redress but, despite its assurances in the final response, there was no evidence it considered further compensation for the delays that happened after August 2022. Further compensation has been ordered.
The landlord acknowledged its complaint handling failures and offered proportionate redress.

Orders

The landlord shall take the following action within four weeks of the date of this report and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders:
1. To apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident further compensation of £850 for the impact of the repair delays after August 2022 (on the assumption that the £800 previously offered has been paid).
3. To confirm to the Ombudsman that it had taken forward the undertakings set out in its final complaint response (listed below) and to provide evidence of examples of how it did so:
  1. To carefully monitoring contractor’s inspections and quotations by the surveyor allocated to assess potential works so customers were updated.
  2. Staff within the customer service centre recognising the importance of understanding repairs which were urgent and took ownership of the repairs,
  3. Discuss this case with its contractor to ensure they were reminded of the importance to fulfil all repairs which were stated on the order.
  4. Take into consideration the urgency of the repair and any quotations which were authorised outside of the normal internal processes.

Recommendation

We recommend the following:
1. The landlord considers further compensation for the resident for the delay in carrying out the damp works to the property.
2. The landlord pays the compensation previously offered for its complaint handling failures (£200) minus any sums previously paid. The finding of reasonable redress is made on the basis that this sum has been paid.