A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202124090)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202124090

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

17 April 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

1. The complaint concerns the landlord’s handling of repairs to the driveway of the resident’s property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a house. The resident took on the tenancy of the property via a mutual exchange in February 2021.
3. In April 2021, the resident raised a complaint with the landlord relating to issues concerning the property’s kitchen and bathroom. A stage one complaint response was sent to the resident on 28 May 2021. The resident requested an escalation of this complaint on 16 September 2021. As part of the grounds stated in requesting the escalation, the resident expressed her dissatisfaction with the condition of the driveway, noting that:
   1. The condition of the driveway left by the previous tenant was a health and safety risk. The surface was uneven and there was a trailing wire across the surface.
   2. The resident had to remove bags of rubble left by the previous tenant at her own expense.
   3. A landlord surveyor had inspected the driveway and informed her that it required resurfacing and would arrange for a contractor to submit a quote for the work, however she had received no further updates on when this would take place.
   4. As a resolution to the complaint, the resident requested that the driveway be resurfaced.
4. The landlord sent a stage two complaint response on 3 December 2021 addressing the residents outstanding issues. Following the intervention of this Service, the landlord sent a follow-up stage two response on 22 June 2022 specifically addressing the elements of the complaint relating to the driveway. In its responses, the landlord:
   1. Accepted that the resident had experienced a poor level of service in how it responded to reports of the condition of the driveway and apologised.
   2. Explained that in December 2021 it had made the decision to bring the repair of the driveway in-house. However, the repairs remained outstanding six months later (at the time the follow-up stage two response was sent). It further explained that this delay was as a result of the work being incorrectly marked as completed on its records, as well as it not properly investigating the issue when contacted by the resident requesting updates.
   3. Offered the resident £195 compensation in recognition of its poor customer service and the time and trouble caused to her in pursing the issue both with the landlord and with this Service.
   4. Confirmed that following an inspection undertaken on 20 June 2022, work had been booked to start on 25 June 2022 and would take place on weekends through July 2022 to resurface the driveway.
5. In referring the case to this Service, the resident described the outstanding issues of the complaint as that the work completed by the landlord to the driveway was of a very poor standard and required to be redone. As a resolution to the complaint, the resident requested that the landlord arrange for a suitably qualified contractor to resurface the driveway and increase its compensation offer in light of the ongoing issues she had experienced since it sent its final response to the complaint.
6. When sending evidence for this case on 23 December 2022, the landlord acknowledged the poor quality of work done to the driveway in June/July 2022. It stated that it would arrange for a new contractor to inspect and complete the outstanding work to the driveway in January 2023, and increased its compensation offer by an additional £150 to £345.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

7. Section 2(3) of the tenancy agreement set outs the landlord’s repair responsibilities. This, in part, states that the landlord will “keep the structure, exterior of the Premises in good repair, including: Means of access to the Premises – including balconies, walkways, hallways, steps and paths”.
8. The landlord’s repair policy categorises it repair types as “Urgent” (respond within 24 hours) and “Standard” (next available appointment that is convenient to the tenant). The landlord’s website defines an urgent repair as a repair that is “deemed necessary to avoid the risk of injury to people, or damage to buildings and property”. While the repairs policy does not provide timescales, standard industry practice is for routine repairs to be completed within 28 calendar days of the issue being reported and for planned repairs (repairs which require additional planning before the work can start; such as the erection of scaffolding, the hiring of specialist contractors or the work costs being subject to approval before they can go ahead) to be completed within three months of the work being approved.
9. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider offering a complainant discretionary compensation in circumstances where it “has taken appropriate action but has delayed in doing so; there is no practical action which would provide a full and appropriate remedy; the complainant has sustained financial loss or has suffered stress and inconvenience”.
10. The landlord’s compensation policy’s remedies guidance categorises its service failure as “low” (£50) “Medium” (£100) and “High” (£150) for making calculations of financial redress. Medium service failure is defined by the landlord as “mistakes [that] usually take longer to resolve, but can usually still be fixed. It might have involved a number of errors being made. For example, a repair that is repeatedly not resolved”. High service failure is defined as “a difficult error to put right. This might be because an opportunity has passed to resolve it or the mistake impacted on the customer’s health, safety or security. An example of this is where we have failed to deal with a repair, the impact of which has affected a customer’s health & safety”. The guidance also states that when calculating the time and trouble caused to a complaint, issues that have taken up to six months to resolve, compensation should be offered at the medium tariff and for issues that have taken over six months, compensation should be offered at the high tariff.

Scope of investigation

11. In her correspondence with both this Service and the landlord, the resident has described the difficulties her and her household experienced due to the condition of the driveway as a result of their existing medical conditions. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments. However, it is beyond the remit of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the household’s health. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.

How the landlord handled repairs to the driveway of the resident’s property

12. Once the landlord had been informed by the resident of the condition of the driveway, it had a duty to respond to the issue in line with its obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and in its published policies and procedures. The landlord’s work orders, repair logs and internal correspondence state that:
    1. After being informed by the resident on 26 July 2021 as to the condition of the driveway, the landlord arranged for a contractor to conduct an inspection on 27 July 2021 and provide it with a quote for the necessary work. The quote to replace the existing driveway was received on 16 September 2021.
    2. The quote was not passed on to the relevant team for approval until 1 December 2021. The landlord has stated that this delay was as a result of staff shortages. The quote was declined on the grounds that it was deemed that a jet wash of the driveway would resolve the outstanding issues.
    3. Following further inspections by a landlord surveyor in January and February 2022, it was determined that the landlord was responsible to put right any trip hazards and additional work was required.
    4. The landlord was informed by the contractor on 6 April 2022 that its original quote for the driveway had expired and declined to submit a new quote.
    5. On 20 June 2022, the landlord took the decision to take the work in-house and the work to resurface the driveway went ahead as described in the background section above.
    6. On 25 July 2022, a landlord surveyor examined the completed work. The surveyor noted that “work had started with a tarmac preparation applied to the concrete base, but due to the excessive heat in the summer it did not set”. The surveyor also reported that the resident had requested that the landlord stop the work.
    7. The landlord requested a quote from a new contractor to complete the work on 26 July 2022. The contractor’s quote was accepted on 15 November 2022. As stated in the background section above, the reason for this delay in accepting the quote was due to the landlord incorrectly marking the driveway work as completed in its records.
13. There has been clear service failure in how the landlord has handled this matter throughout the time period considered in this report. The resident has experienced significant delays, poor communication and the work that was completed was done to a poor standard. This has not been disputed by the landlord. It was therefore appropriate for it to apologise to the resident, offer compensation and arrange for a new contractor to complete the work to the driveway. The landlord has also stated that training had been given to staff members involved in the matter to prevent a similar occurrence happening in the future. This position is in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles of: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
14. The compensation offered by the landlord was calculated in line with the remedies guidance in its compensation policy detailed above. The £195 compensation offered during the complaints process was calculated at the medium level tariff for the landlord’s poor service and the time and trouble caused to the resident. The additional compensation of £150 was calculated at the high level tariff for the further time and trouble the ongoing delays had caused the resident. The Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (which is available on our website). recommends a payment of £100 to £600 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration. This includes distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved. While the landlord’s overall compensation of £345 falls within this guidance, this amount is inadequate in light of the significant delays experienced by the resident (the driveway repairs had been outstanding for at least 18 months), the landlord’s poor communication and record-keeping which caused the delays, the poor level of workmanship to the driveway, and the time and trouble caused to the resident in having to seek the intervention of this Service in order for the landlord to progress the complaint into the matter.
15. Therefore, it is ordered that the landlord should pay the resident an additional £255 compensation, to make the total compensation award for its service failures £600. It should be noted that this compensation considers the period from when the resident raised the issue in July 2021, up to when the landlord agreed to work with the resident to get its new contractor to complete the repairs in January 2023.
16. While it was appropriate for the landlord to agree to the resident’s request for it to arrange for a new contractor to complete the work, it is not clear that the work to the driveway has now been completed to an acceptable standard, and if it has, what date the work was completed. Therefore, it is ordered that the landlord write to the resident to explain the current status of the work. The landlord should also consider offering the resident further compensation for any additional delays in completing the work to the driveway from January 2023 onwards. It should then write to the resident to inform her of its decision.

Determination

17. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of how it handled repairs to the driveway of the resident’s property.

Orders

18. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £600 compensation. This is inclusive of the £345 awarded by the landlord.
    2. Write to the resident to explain the current status of the work.
    3. Consider offering the resident further compensation for any additional delays in completing the work to the driveway from January 2023 onwards. It should then write to the resident to inform her of its decision.
19. It is the Ombudsman’s position that compensation awarded by this Service should be treated separately from any financial arrangements between the landlord and resident and should not be offset against any arrears.