Arcon Housing Association Limited (202004939)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202004939

Arcon Housing Association Limited

5 January 2024

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s (the Service) 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:
1. Handling of reports of repairs after the resident moved into the property.
2. Handling of the resident’s request for the electrical safety certificate.
3. Complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a one bedroom ground floor flat within a 2 storey building. The tenancy began on 6 January 2020. The landlord has some vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.

Landlord’s obligations

The landlord’s repairs policy says:
1. Emergency repairs are those that could result in an immediate risk to the property or health and safety of people.
2. Urgent repairs are responsive repairs that need to be dealt with quickly.
3. Routine repairs do not need to be dealt with quickly but cannot be left until for planned programme of works. It explains it will respond within 10 working days for routine repairs.
The landlord’s void procedure sets out the minimum standard it expects the property to be prior to a new tenant moving in. It says:
1. Decoration vouchers should be issued for rooms which require decoration.
2. A full periodic inspection report is to be carried out at void stage by an electrical contractor. On receipt of the report the landlord is to check and action any essential remedial works necessary, before property is re-let.
The landlord’s lettable standard information says a property will meet the following points, amongst other things, to be considered at a ‘lettable standard’:
1. clean- including sanitising the kitchen and bathroom floors
2. safe- it will carry out gas and electricity checks including smoke alarms
3. secure- replace front and back door locks.
The landlord’s complaints policy says:
1. A stage 1 complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days with it aiming to provide a response within 10 working days.
2. A stage 2 complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days and it will aim to provide a response within 15 working days.
3. If it needs more time at either stage, it will contact the resident to explain why and will not exceed a further 10 working days to provide a full response.

Summary of events

In December 2019 the landlord completed void work at the property. Here it provided a schedule of work for its contractor to compete. The schedule listed, amongst other things:
1. a full clear of the property
2. decoration
3. discoloured grouting to tiles in the bathroom to be cleaned and regrout. It said this could be completed once the property was tenanted
4. electricity test which was completed in December 2019.
On 20 December 2019 the landlord’s contractor said it had cleaned the property including the bathroom tiles but asked for the grouting to be arranged in the new year.
The landlord has provided the Service with a domestic electrical installation condition report (EICR) which was completed on 23 December 2019, the assessment was marked satisfactory.
The landlord’s internal notes show it followed up on an electric test certificate on 2 January 2020 and on 24 January 2020 it asked its contractor to update electric stickers to the unit at the property.
The tenancy started on 6 January 2020. At the same time, the landlord completed a void standard checklist. This was signed by the resident and confirmed that no decoration issues were raised. However, it noted that the kitchen and bedroom doors needed to be eased and adjusted.
On 24 January 2020 the landlord chased its contractor for an update on completing grouting work at the property. The landlord has said its contractor attended to complete grouting works on 18 February 2020 but was refused access.
On 24 February 2020 an internal email from the landlord said it visited the property on 21 February 2020. The landlord has told the Service that this is what it later refers to as an inspection from 25 February 2020. The email from 24 February 2020 noted the following:
1. The resident said that the landlord failed to complete his repairs within 6 weeks.
2. The resident said the bathroom grouting was still outstanding.
3. Its contractor had tried to attend without an appointment.
4. A stain was showing through the decoration and the resident asked for vouchers to decorate the room himself.
5. It listed items for repair which included doors, bathroom grouting, new toilet pan and for it to provide a voucher for £25.
On 25 May 2020 the landlord’s internal email, following another visit to the property, listed further queries raised by the resident. This included a request for it to reposition the shower and draught being caused by a gap between the skirting and flooring.
On 3 June 2020 the landlord spoke to the resident. Here it told him that he could continue with decorating. The resident repeated his previous queries about repositioning the shower to which the landlord explained it would not alter the shower.
On 6 June 2020 the resident told the landlord that it had not completed “decent” repairs to an acceptable standard. He said this related to painting/decorating the property. He said he saw repairs were needed at the viewing but accepted the tenancy despite these. He also said that it should have completed all the repairs prior to advertising the property.
On 11 June 2020 the resident told the landlord that an extractor fan in the bathroom was not working. The landlord followed up on this on 15 and 16 June 2020, it told the resident that the fan would not count as emergency work and that it would attend to it once Covid-19 restrictions had been lifted. The landlord sent a further email about the fan on 19 June 2020 explaining how it should work.
On 24 June 2020 the resident told the landlord that it had exceeded the 12 weeks for right to repair in relation to the fan. The landlord told him it had chased up the issue but due to the Covid-19 restrictions it may not be possible for staff to attend. The landlord provided a further update on 26 June 2020 telling the resident that it was unsure when site visits would continue but would update him.
The landlord has noted an inspection from 16 July 2020. Whilst the Service has not been provided with a copy of the inspection report, the landlord’s email from 29 July 2020 explains its position on issues raised by the resident. It said:
1. Covid-19 restrictions had impacted it completing the grouting works
2. the bathroom fan had been fixed the day before (15 July 2020), it asked the resident to confirm it was working
3. it would not reposition the shower as it was functional.
The resident sent an email on 22 July 2020 chasing up a repair. When the landlord asked for clarification on the repair, it was told it was about making part of the bathroom waterproof. The landlord then spoke to the resident about the boxing in of pipes on 30 July 2020.
The resident raised his complaint on 15 September 2020. He said:
1. He was complaining about the state of the property from when he moved into it.
2. The landlord had not met its repair/replacement policy under the right to repair and replacement.
3. It entered false electrical safety test on his file.
The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 16 September 2020 and said its response covered the complaints raised by the resident in email from 28 August 2020 onwards. It confirmed:
1. electricity test was completed on 23 December 2019, prior to the resident moving into property on 6 January 2020 and a copy had been emailed to the resident.
2. Gas safety check had been completed and the resident had been sent a copy of the certificate.
3. An order was raised to re-grout tiling but the resident refused access on 18 February 2020.
The landlord’s notes show it cancelled the grouting works on 16 September 2020 and said “cancelled by resident, will complete work himself”.
The landlord sent a further email on 29 September 2020 and said this would cover the emails sent to it from 16 September onwards. Here amongst other things, it said:
1. It would not box the pipework.
2. It had agreed to re-grout but the resident refused the works on 18 February 2020. It said it would raise this work again.
The landlord has provided an extract of its repairs log to show when it completed grouting work. The extract shows the grouting work was completed by the landlord on or around 13 October 2020.
In May 2021 the resident contacted the Service about his complaint. The landlord was contacted on 21 May 2021 and on 25 May 2021 it said it would contact the resident.
On 17 June 2021 the landlord told the Service it would issue a stage 2 response and it did this on 24 June 2021. Here the landlord detailed its previous responses and said:
1. It recognised its oversight in not giving resident opportunity to escalate his complaint to stage 2
2. In response to the concerns about an electrical safety certificate, it said it was required to complete an electrical condition inspection before it re-let the property and had provided a copy of the certificate to the resident.
3. It included detail of the maintenance work for the property from the time the resident moved into it.
4. It said the complaint specifically related to the condition of property when the resident moved in. It explained that works were identified following its surveyor’s inspection on 25 February 2020. It listed this work and apologised that there were outstanding repairs when he moved into the property. It said some work the resident wanted was deemed unnecessary following its further inspection on 16 July 2020. It said that the most recent work it raised was a gesture of goodwill and not work identified as required by its surveyor’s.
5. It said the resident’s behaviour towards its staff was unreasonable.
6. In conclusion the landlord partially upheld the resident’s complaints. It said there were some outstanding works required when he moved into the property. It said it had completed an inspection in February 2020 and completed the required works. It told the resident that some of the work he had asked it to complete was not done because there were no defects. But said it had completed the work as a goodwill gesture.
7. It told the resident that he had reached the end of its complaint’s process and provided him with the Service’s contact details.

Post internal complaints process

Following the landlord’s stage 2 response there were a number of new issues raised by the resident and several correspondence between him and the landlord. The contact included the following issues:
1. On 15 July 2021 the landlord told the resident its surveyor did not believe the bathroom needed replacing.
2. It explained that given the resident’s request for extra care accommodation through the local authority, it did not think he would be waiting long and as such it would not change the bathroom set up.
3. Issues about how a radiator was fitted and how to use the thermostat facility. The radiator issue was resolved in October 2021.
4. On 22 November 2021 the resident told the landlord that he no longer wanted to move and asked for it to replace the shower with a bath.
5. The resident raised concerns about the bathroom and a box around the pipework. The landlord completed the box around the pipework in November 2021 and it is understood that as a gesture of good will it completed work to the bathroom in December 2022.
The landlord has told this Service that since its stage 2 response it had completed all agreed repairs for the resident. It said that since this complaint it had implemented changes in its complaints and void processes.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident reported a number of repairs to the landlord between February and July 2020. These reports included bathroom grouting, decoration work and an extractor fan that was not working. At that time the resident also made requests for the landlord to provide him with an electrical certificate. The resident has said these were issues the landlord should have resolved before it advertised the property. Within his complaint from September 2020 the resident has referred to the overall state of the property when he moved into it.
The Service would usually expect a resident to raise a concern with a landlord within a reasonable timeframe, 6 months, of the matters arising. As such issues that were not mentioned to the landlord within a reasonable time have not been considered within this report. It follows that this report will focus on the reports of repairs and requests that the landlord was made aware of within a reasonable timeframe mainly the bathroom grouting, decoration works and extractor fan.
It is acknowledged that this was a difficult time for the resident especially as he had moved into a new property. The evidence provided shows that the landlord and resident continued to communicate about further issues after the stage 2 response from 24 June 2021. It is noted that the landlord has said it has completed additional work to the property since, with the bathroom being replaced in December 2022. It is important to explain that it is the Ombudsman’s role to investigate complaints brought to it that have exhausted a landlord’s internal complaints process. As such this investigation report concerns matter which were subject to the landlord’s final response from 24 June 2021. Any complaints after this date will not form part of this investigation.

Handling of reports of repair after the resident moved into the property

As mentioned previously between February 2020 and July 2020 the resident raised reports about the bathroom grouting, decoration work and an extractor fan that was not working.
As part of void work the landlord raised a schedule of work that included grouting of bathroom tiles and decoration work. Internal emails from December 2019 explained that the property was not a standard decoration and needed a “full wash down with sugar soap, fill holes and prepare surfaces due to heavy nicotine stains.” In light of the landlord’s concerns about the property its requests here were reasonable.
It is understood that the resident visited the property on 6 January 2020 and signed a void checklist. There is no evidence to show concerns were raised about the bathroom grouting or decoration of the property at that time.
1. Bathroom grouting
It is noted that the contractor confirmed it had completed a clean that included tiles on 20 December 2019 but asked for the grouting to be planned in for the new year. The landlord agreed for this to be completed once the property was tenanted. When considering the bathroom had been cleaned, the landlord’s decision to complete the grouting work once the property was tenanted was reasonable and in line with its lettable standards.
Within the stage 1 response the landlord said its contractor attended on 18 February 2020 to complete the grouting work but was denied access. The landlord has not provided evidence surrounding the events of 18 February 2020, but it is noted that this has not been disputed and the resident confirmed a contractor had attempted to attend around that time.
However there is no evidence to show the landlord took any further action with the grouting work after 18 February 2020. Whilst its email from 24 February 2020 listed the grouting work as an outstanding repair, it did not progress this further. This was not appropriate.
The evidence shows that it was only after the resident’s complaint from 15 September 2020 that the landlord raised the grouting works again. It is understood, from the evidence provided, that the work was completed on or around 13 October 2020. The landlord took over 10 months to complete grouting work to the bathroom. It decided this work was required during the void process, it also listed the grouting as outstanding work on 24 February 2020 but missed opportunities to complete this work sooner or update the resident. The delay in resolving the matter was not appropriate.
1. Decoration
The landlord’s internal email from 24 February 2020 noted the resident’s concern about a patch on the bedroom wall. The landlord said it found no meter readings suggesting damp and said it was a stain that was showing through the decoration. The landlord told the resident its decorator would attend but the resident asked for vouchers to complete the decorative work himself. It is understood the landlord agreed to this.
The evidence shows the first report of an issue with the decoration was raised on 21 February 2020 which the landlord referred to within its email from 24 February 2020. The landlord acted appropriately in offering to complete further decoration and it was reasonable for it to accept the resident’s request for vouchers to complete the work himself.
1. Extractor fan
On 11 June 2020 the resident told the landlord that the extractor fan in the bathroom was not working. The landlord responded on 15 June 2020 and said it would log the issue but due to Covid-19 restrictions it could only attend for health and safety emergencies that involved a threat of harm. It repeated its position on 16 June 2020 and on 19 June 2020 it provided some guidance about how to switch the fan on and explained the fan would only work if the humidity was high. It said that if this did not resolve the issue it would raise an order for a fix or replacement. The resident responded the same day to say the fan did not work.
The evidence shows the landlord agreed to raise the work order and told the resident that due to restrictions its contractor may not be able to attend. The evidence shows the work was completed on 15 July 2020. When considering the impact of Covid-19 restriction the timeframe of just over one month to complete the repair work to the extractor fan was reasonable in the circumstances.
Overall the landlord’s handling of reports of repair about the bathroom grouting was not appropriate. However its response to the decoration issue and extractor fan was appropriate in the circumstances.
The landlord was aware of the grouting issue in December 2019 and listed it as an outstanding repair on 24 February 2020. However it failed to follow up on this until after the resident’s complaint. Whilst it acted in line with its lettable standard to let the property with the grouting issue outstanding, it should not have taken it 10 months to complete the grouting work.
It is accepted that the timeframe mentioned would have been impacted by Covid-19 restrictions at that time and that once the restrictions had eased the landlord may have had a backlog. When considering this, the delay in getting matters resolved would not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the resident as the issue was eventually resolved. However it is accepted that the resident would have been caused disappointment at that time. The landlord’s failings here amount to a service failure.

Response to the resident’s request for the electrical safety certificate

The evidence shows that a domestic EICR was completed on 23 December 2019. This assessment was satisfactory and the landlord was provided with a certificate on 2 January 2020. Here the landlord acted appropriately in making sure the property was safe and fit for the resident to live in.
On 9 June 2020 the resident told the landlord that he had not received the electrical safety certificate. He said this meant the landlord had not completed an inspection. The landlord provided a copy of the EICR on 29 September 2020 and again on 20 November 2020, explaining it was completed on 23 December 2019. Whilst it is acknowledged that the landlord was not obliged to share the EICR with the resident at that time, its decision to do so was reasonable to help alleviate the resident’s concerns about the safety of the electric within the property.
Overall, the landlord acted appropriately in ensuring the property was safe and fit for the resident. Its response to the resident’s concerns about the electrical test was appropriate. It follows there was no maladministration for this aspect of the resident’s complaint.

Complaint handling

The resident raised his complaint on 15 September 2020 and the landlord appropriately responded on 16 September 2020. It provided a further response on 29 September 2020 covering emails received from the resident after 16 September 2020.
On 21 May 2021 the Service contacted the landlord about the resident’s complaint. The landlord responded on 25 May 2021 to say it would contact the resident and in a further update to the Service on 17 June 2021 it explained it would issue a stage 2 response. The stage 2 response was issued with 23 working days on 24 June 2021.
Whilst the landlord’s stage 2 response exceeded the timeframe set within its complaint’s policy, this slight delay would not have had a significant impact on the resident and as such the timeframe to issue its stage 2 response was reasonable in the circumstances. This is especially because there is no evidence to show the resident escalated his complaint directly with the landlord between September 2020 and May 2021.
However, it is acknowledged that the landlord did not include information about its stage 2 process within its initial complaint response and that this may have led the resident to escalate his complaint to the Service instead of contacting it directly. The landlord appropriately acknowledged the missing information and acted reasonably in apologising for its omission.
Overall whilst the landlord took almost 9 months to conclude its internal complaints process, on balance this would not have caused a significant impact to the resident as he was aware of its position in relation to the complaint points raised.
The landlord’s complaint handling was not appropriate and amounts to a service failure. The landlord has provided evidence to show that since responding to the resident’s complaint, it has completed a self-assessment in April 2022 against the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. The landlord’s steps to self-assess have been acknowledged and are appropriate. As such no further orders or recommendations have been made.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was a service failure in the landlord’s:
1. Handling of reports of repairs after the resident moved into the property
2. Complaint handling.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for the electrical certificate.

Reasons

The landlord caused delay in its handling of repairs for the bathroom grouting. It is accepted that it would have been impacted by Covid-19 restrictions at that time, however it missed opportunities to keep the resident updated with this work. This would have caused the resident some disappoint and amounts to a service failure.
The landlord appropriately assessed the electricity during the void period in completing an EICR. When the resident asked for a certificate it acted reasonably in sharing the report with him to help alleviate concerns about electrical safety at the property.
The landlord’s complaint response timeframe were reasonable however it failed to tell the resident how to escalate his complaint if he remained unhappy within its stage 1 response. This was a minor failing and amounts to a service failure.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders the landlord to apologies to the resident for the failings mentioned in this report. This should be within four weeks of the date of this report.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £100 compensation within four weeks of the date of this report. This compensation amount is to recognise the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident for the delays in handling of repairs. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears.