Platform Housing Group Limited (202114386)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202114386

Platform Housing Group Limited

28 February 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 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 response to the resident’s request for it to make improvements to his kitchen.

Background and summary of events

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord
3. On 19 March 2021, the resident submitted an alterations and modifications form to the landlord which included pictures of the layout of his kitchen. The resident explained that he wanted an update regarding his request for alterations to his kitchen as he had already submitted this twice. It is not clear from the evidence provided when the previous two requests were made by the resident.
4. The landlord sent an email to the resident in response to his alteration and modification request on 1 April 2021, stating that the kitchen had been replaced prior to the commencement of his tenancy. The landlord explained that as there was no service failure, the resident could carry out the alterations himself and incur the costs of this. Furthermore, he was advised that, as per the landlord’s rules for alterations, he would have to restore the cupboard and put the kitchen back to its original configuration if he moved out of the property.
5. On 15 April 2021, the resident sent a follow-up email to the landlord and explained that he was reporting a major design problem with his kitchen and he wanted the landlord to look into this. Records show that this was the first complaint to the landlord detailing his concerns about the challenges he was facing with the layout of the kitchen. He explained that the main issue he was facing on a day-to-day basis was the lack of worktop space for preparing food and lack of cupboard space. He explained that this was having a profound impact on the amount of food shopping he could do. He stated that there was a large cupboard running from the floor to the ceiling that was unnecessary as it had very few shelves or useful storage. This would be better taken out completely so that the fridge could be moved to the area and the worktop extended and new cupboards added above and below the worktop. He explained that this small addition would improve day-to-day life in the property.
6. On 25 May 2021, the resident sent a further email asking to submit a complaint about the kitchen so that it could be escalated.
7. Evidence provided by the landlord shows that the resident made a request for an escalation of his complaint on 4 June 2021. The request for an escalation appears to have been sent before the landlord had issued a stage one complaint response.
8. The landlord has provided evidence to show that a quick resolution was logged on 6 June 2021. The landlord’s complaints policy shows that a quick resolution will only be applied to the complaint process in situations where an issue can be resolved within 2-working days. At this stage, the landlord confirmed that the kitchen was accepted when the property was let to the resident in 2018; it was last renewed in 2006/2008 and was therefore, not due again for some time but the resident could apply to carry out any alterations himself. The landlord referred to its discussion with the resident regarding concerns about the financial cost of these alterations and how if he moved from the property, any benefit of these alterations would be lost. The landlord provided a Schedule of Conditions and “Right to Compensation” information explaining how he would be able to claim compensation for the alterations to the property if he moved out.
9. Records show that on 8 June 2021, the landlord had a telephone discussion with the resident regarding his complaint after he challenged the landlord’s decision to decline to make alterations to his kitchen.
10. On 17 June 2021, the landlord emailed a response to the resident and explained that the letter was in response to his request to escalate his complaint on 4 June 2021. The landlord maintained its position that it was not responsible for upgrading the kitchen.  
11. On 23 June 2021, the resident made a request to have his complaint reviewed. He explained that as the kitchen was installed in 2008, it was thirteen years old and due for replacement. He reiterated that the landlord should make the alteration as it is the landlord’s property. He explained that he wanted a more senior member of staff to look at his case including pictures sent on 19 March 2021. He explained that the request being made was for minor changes and that the limitations of the storage made him question if the space would be adequate were he to start a family.
12. The landlord emailed the resident on 28 June 2021 explaining that kitchens have a lifespan of 20 years, subject to survey. Therefore, his kitchen was not due for review until 2028. It asked the resident to clarify the minor changes he had referred to in his email on 23 June 2021.
13. On 28 June 2021, the resident emailed the landlord and explained that he has been told different lifespans for the kitchen ranging from 10 years, 15 years and now 20 years. He explained the changes he had requested above and mentioned that this would greatly benefit the property with a more functional kitchen to serve anyone’s needs who would live there.
14. On 2 July 2021, the landlord escalated the complaint for a final review and a response was scheduled for 30 July 2021. The landlord emailed a final response to the resident on 29 July 2021. The landlord reiterated its position regarding the resident’s request for alterations to his kitchen and explained the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy mentioned above.

Assessment and findings

Policies and procedures

15. The tenancy agreement states under right to improve that “after the tenancy has become an assured (non-shorthold) the tenant may make improvements, alterations and additions to the premises including additions in the Association’s installations, fixtures and fittings, provided that the Tenant has first obtained the written consent of the Association and all the necessary approvals (planning permission or building regulation). The Association shall not unreasonably withhold its consent but may make it conditional upon the work’s being carried out to a certain standard. Failure to seek the Association’s consent or comply with the Association’s conditions shall be a breach of the Tenant’s obligations under the Tenancy”.
16. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that a secure tenant has the right to make alterations provided that they obtain written permission before they carry out any works and seek all relevant permissions including Planning and Building Regulations approval.
17. The repair and maintenance policy further states that “we will not unreasonably withhold consent when a request to carry out improvements/alterations is made. If consent is provided then the customer will become responsible for subsequent repairs, maintenance or replacement of the improvement/alteration”.
18. “At the end of the tenancy, a customer may claim compensation for certain eligible improvements carried out provided they have the relevant consent”.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to make improvements to his kitchen

19. In line with the tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for maintaining the structure of the property, including the fitted kitchen and keeping it in a good state of repair. However, the landlord would not generally be expected to make improvements to the property, including altering the layout of the kitchen. It is acknowledged that the alterations the resident has suggested may make the kitchen easier to use, but this would not mean the landlord is obliged to pay for such works.
20. In line with the government’s Decent Homes Standard which provides guidance for landlords, a kitchen should be considered for replacement if it is over 20 years old. Therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord to advise the resident that it would not replace the kitchen until it was 20 years old, in line with this guidance and industry best practice.
21. As stated in the tenancy agreement, residents are entitled to carry out improvements to their property, such as making alterations to the kitchen at their own expense. The resident would be expected to seek permission from the landlord before carrying out any improvements but the landlord should not unreasonably refuse to give permission. Therefore, it was appropriate for the landlord to advise the resident that he could apply for permission to make alterations to the kitchen at his own expense if he wished to. The landlord also correctly explained that the resident could claim compensation towards the cost of improvements he had carried out at the end of his tenancy.

Determination (decision)

22. In accordance with Paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to make improvements to his kitchen.

Reasons

23. The landlord complied with the terms of the tenancy agreement and by advising that the resident would be responsible for the cost of carrying out and maintaining any alterations to the kitchen.