Bromford Housing Group Limited (202213839)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202213839

Bromford Housing Group Limited

14 September 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 responses to the resident’s request to replace the windows in the property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a flat.
3. On 16 February 2022 the resident called the landlord to complain about its handling of the issue. The landlord’s notes state that the resident explained:
   1. The resident had been waiting since April 2021 for her windows to be replaced.
   2. She called the landlord’s contractor, who attended on 17 January 2022. The contractor informed her that there was nothing they could do as the windows needed replacing.
   3. She had been chasing the issue up with the landlord but had received no updates on the status of the windows or when they will be replaced.
   4. Her heating bills had increased due to the poor condition of the windows.
4. The landlord sent its complaint response on 2 March 2022, then a stage two complaint response on 16 December 2022. In its responses the landlord acknowledged there had been delays with the windows, and confusion about the status of some repairs. It explained that the resident had reported a window repair issue in April 2021, following which its operatives had identified in May 2021 the need to replace a single pane of glass. That repair had been significantly delayed, and confusion caused when the landlord had incorrectly informed the resident the matter was the resident’s responsibility to resolve. A repair appointment had been arranged for January 2022, which was then delayed due to the ongoing repair vs replace decision. It apologised for the delays and confusion, but explained that:
   1. Its planned maintenance programme arranges stock condition surveys of the components in its properties every five years to ensure that they are in an acceptable condition. Windows normally have a lifespan of 30 years. The windows in the resident’s property were last replaced in 1998 and are due to be next replaced in 2028.
   2. The stock condition survey found the resident’s windows to be in a reasonable condition with no health and safety concerns. It had therefore taken the decision not to change the replacement date of 2028.
   3. It would arrange a further inspection of the windows to identify all outstanding repairs and then raise the necessary work orders to complete the repairs.

5. The landlord offered £150 compensation in recognition of the poor service the resident received and the delays in completing the window repair. The landlord explained it would consider any increased heating costs the resident had experienced, and asked her to provide information showing her costs and increases.

6. In referring the case to this Service, the resident reiterated her concern that the windows were not in an acceptable condition. She wanted the landlord to replace them.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

7. The landlord’s repairs policy describes its planned maintenance programme. This states that the landlord’s “Investment in Existing Homes Team identifies programmes of planned preventative maintenance, renewal and improvement programmes across all our homes, completing works in the most economically viable way including planned renewal of single components e.g. kitchens/bathrooms [and] combined renewal of multiple building components e.g. renewal of fascia, soffit and rainwater goods with roof covering or with windows”. It also explains that it “bases planned renewals on component age and condition but may accelerate works where product repair due to the unavailability of spares will lead to an unacceptable delay in repair and is foreseeable”.
8. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider offering discretionary compensation in circumstances where it had recognised that there had been a failure in providing a service. The policy does not give any guidance on levels of payment, but notes that it follows the Housing Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (which is available on our website) when calculating awards.

The landlord’s responses to the resident’s request to replace the windows in the property

9. Once informed by the resident of her dissatisfaction with the condition of the windows, the landlord had a duty to respond to the matter in line with its obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and its published policies and procedures.
10. In response to the resident’s reports the landlord arranged inspections, and then followed up on the inspection recommendation that it arrange a further stock condition survey. In July and August 2022 all properties in the resident’s block were surveyed. The landlord’s internal correspondence following the completion of the inspections state that its surveyors found the windows in the resident’s home to be in an acceptable condition, whereas other properties had windows in worse condition, and needed to be prioritised for replacement. It therefore took the decision not to change the original 2028 replacement date for the resident’s windows, and raised work orders to complete outstanding repairs needed for them. The landlord explained the reasons for this decision in its stage two complaint response.
11. Social landlords have limited resources and are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. In view of this, landlords have to decide between repairing windows or replacing them. Where it is possible to repair them, and there are other properties where that option may not be possible, it is entitled to decide to repair rather than replace – provided it is acting in line with the technical advice it has received. In this case the landlord’s decision was reasonable because those were the circumstances present in the resident’s case, and it was acting in line with its policy on the matter and the advice it had received.
12. The resident informed the landlord that the contractor who first inspected the windows stated that they needed to be replaced. The landlord has provided an email chain from 22 February 2022 to 1 March 21022 between it and its window contractor. The contractor states that it could find no record of advising that the windows should be replaced. It said that  when the resident asked about replacement it had advised her to contact the landlord, as it was unable make that decision.
13. While the landlord’s decision to repair rather than replace the windows was reasonable, there were clear delays which caused significant inconvenience to the resident while it made that decision. It appears that the original repair reported in April 2021 was not resolved until after the landlord’s final complaint response in December 2022. That was not a reasonable period to wait, as the landlord’s repair obligation was not suspended by the decision making process for the replacement – it was still obliged to ensure the windows were in a reasonable condition, and the delay shows that it had not met that obligation for a significant period. In that circumstance the landlord’s compensation of £150 cannot be said to be proportionate to the scale of the delay, meaning that the resident’s complaint was not appropriately remedied.
14. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns that she had experienced increased heating usage was appropriate, as it needed further information in order to establish if her heating consumption was higher during the period of the outstanding repair. It is important to appreciate that consumption, rather than costs is the relevant metric to consider, because cost increases do not always align with increased usage. It is not apparent if such information was provided. Nonetheless, the landlord should remain open to considering any relevant evidence the resident may provide to it for the issue.

Determination

15. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of the complaint.

Orders

16. In light of the repair delay caused by the landlord while it resolved its repair or replace decision, it is ordered to pay the resident £400. This is inclusive of the £150 it had already offered.
17. This payment must be made within four weeks of this report, and evidence of doing so provided to this Service.