London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202008449)

A picture containing logo

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202008449

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

30 December 2021

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 complaint concerns:
1. How the landlord handled repairs at the property prior to January 2020.
2. How the landlord handled repairs at the property, including reports of damp and mould, from January 2020 onwards.
3. The associated formal complaint into these matters.

Jurisdiction

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated. After carefully considering all the evidence, the following aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

How the landlord handled repairs at the property prior to January 2020

When raising her complaint with the landlord on 24 August 2020, the resident stated that she had experienced problems with reporting repairs for the previous five years. During a telephone conversation with this Service on 19 October 2021, the resident stated that the problems she had experienced in reporting repairs had been an ongoing issue for 20 years.
The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner, so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and whilst the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historic it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues.
Our decision not to investigate the historical issues is in accordance with paragraph 39(e) of the Scheme, which states that we will not consider complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within six months of the matters arising. In view of the time periods involved in this case, taking into account the availability and reliability of evidence, this assessment does not consider any specific events prior to January 2020. The historical issues provide contextual background to the current complaint, but the assessment is focussed on the landlord’s actions in responding to the more recent events and, specifically, to the formal complaint made in August 2020.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a house.
The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will attend emergency repairs within 24 hours and that it will arrange a mutually convenient appointment to attend all other repairs. Emergency repairs are defined as a repair where there is “an immediate danger to the occupant or members of the public”.
During the period of the complaint, the landlord was operating a restricted service due to the Covid-19 pandemic. This resulted in repairs that were deemed non-urgent being postponed. The landlord continued to respond to repairs deemed critical during this period. It defined a critical repair as “an emergency or very urgent works that should be completed ‘in days’ and that cannot be safely left for any longer than that”.
The landlord operates a two-stage complaints policy. When a complaint is raised, the landlord will provide a complaint response within ten working days. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the response, they can request an escalation to the next stage. The landlord will then undertake a review of the complaint and send a stage two response to the complainant within 20 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.
The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider compensation when it has failed to follow its policies, procedures or guidelines; for loss of facilities or amenities in the home; failure to respond to a complaint within its target time; or failure to complete repairs within its agreed response time.
The policy states that the landlord will consider discretionary payments that recognise individual household circumstances. It also states that while the landlord does not pay compensation for loss of earnings, it may offer a goodwill payment in recognition of the time and trouble an issue may have taken to be resolved.
From 1 April 2020 onwards, the landlord has operated under an interim compensation policy in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. This policy suspended non-statutory compensation payments under almost all circumstances other than for rehousing or to reimburse a resident’s out-of-pocket expenses due to its service failure. However, the policy also states that it would consider compensation for complaints made after 1 April 2020 on a case-by-case basis.

Summary of events

The landlord’s repair logs state that: Work was raised on 20 January 2020 to treat mould in the bathroom, hallway, and kitchen in the property. The resident reported an uncontrollable leak from the bathroom toilet on 13 February 2020. This was marked as completed on the same day. Follow-on work was then raised on 14 February 2020 as the toilet cistern was not hanging level. This was marked as completed on 20 March 2020. The resident called the landlord on 14 February 2020 to state her unhappiness that she would have to wait for the issue to be resolved as there was a bad smell from the pipework.
On 13 March 2020 the resident reported that window frames were crumbling and causing draughts into the property. An inspection was arranged for 9 April 2020. The landlord informed the resident, on 1 April 2020, that due to the Covid-19 pandemic, non-essential repairs had been put on hold.
On 27 May 2020, the resident reported that the lock on the front door was unsecure, and this was marked as completed on the same day. A work order was raised, on 19 June 2020 following a report of broken guttering. This was then cancelled as it was not deemed to be an essential repair.
On 9 July 2020 the landlord and resident discussed the new contractor who would be dealing with the damp and mould issues in the property. They also discussed compensation for the delays in completing the work to the bathroom. A further telephone call occurred on 17 July 2020 where the outstanding work at the property was discussed, and the landlord advised the resident to contact their contractors regarding their availability during the Covid-19 pandemic.
An appointment was arranged for 27 July 2020 for the new contractor to re-assess the damp and mould at the property. A damp survey was then arranged to be undertaken on 3 August 2020.
The survey report was sent to the landlord on 11 August 2020, stating as follows:
1. Cracked guttering had overflowed and caused damp to a bedroom wall.
2. The bedroom windows needed to be resealed.
3. Trickle vents had been kept closed which had added moisture to the property and mould had developed on the back bedroom windows.
4. There was a damp patch on the living room ceiling from an unknown source which required further investigation.
5. The resident had stated that there was mould behind the washing machine, but she did not want the washing machine pulled out.
On 24 August 2020 the resident raised a complaint with the landlord as follows:
1. She had experienced poor service from the landlord and its contractors for the last four years.
2. The quality of completed work in the bathroom and kitchen was of an unacceptable standard.
3. There had been missed call backs and poor communication from the landlord about the ongoing repairs.
4. The length of time it was taking to complete repairs was unacceptable and she should be compensated.
The landlord replied to the resident on 25 August 2020. It explained it would provide her feedback about its communication to the relevant parties and would raise her request for compensation internally. The landlord confirmed that three work orders were open relating to mould and damp treatments; repairs to the bathroom, hallway, and kitchen; and repairs to the roof. It also advised her to contact her occupational therapist (OT) regarding her request for a higher wash hand basin.
On 8 September 2020 the landlord called the resident to inform her that work orders relating to the fence and extractor fan had been added and that it was still waiting to hear back about her compensation request.
A further telephone call occurred on 13 October 2020 where the complaint and compensation were discussed. The landlord’s notes of the call stated that the resident requested £1,000 compensation for the delay in completing repairs to the bathroom.
On 19 October 2020 the landlord awarded the resident £250 in shopping vouchers in recognition of the loss of use of the bathroom for four weeks.
On 9 November 2020 the resident called this Service and expressed dissatisfaction with how her complaint had been handled by the landlord and that she had yet to receive a formal response. This Service passed on the resident’s concerns to the landlord on 12 November 2020.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 18 November 2020 and provided an update on the repairs. It explained that:
1. The guttering work had been approved and the contractor would be in contact to arrange an appointment.
2. The bathroom, hallway and kitchen work had been completed and a special paint coat had been used.
3. Work to the gap between the bedroom floor and wall had been booked for 19 December 2020 and the bathroom extractor fan appointment had been arranged for 6 January 2021.
4. Work to the front garden gate would be booked when the landlord’s repairs team resumed normal service.
5. The job relating to the kitchen flooring was closed as the contactor was unable to contact the resident. The work will now be re-raised.
6. Paperwork would be sent to the resident within the next week to allow her to choose between its contractor completing internal decorations or for her to receive the money to arrange the decorations herself.
The landlord’s 18 November 2020 email made no comment on the status of the resident’s complaint or when a stage one response would be provided. She called the landlord on the same day to inform it that replacement heaters for the bedroom were not adequate. This was acknowledged by the landlord on 19 November 2020. On 1 December 2020, the resident called the landlord to cancel the appointment to rehang the radiator in the bedroom as the wall was still wet.
The resident contacted this Service on 1 December 2020 to state that she had yet to receive a complaint response. This Service wrote to the landlord on 2 December 2020 and requested that a complaint response be provided to the resident within five working days. Following a further telephone call from the resident on 18 January 2021, this Service wrote to the landlord again to request it send a complaint response
The landlord wrote to the resident on 20 January 2021. It explained that it had raised work for its damp/mould specialist to attend the property as all brickwork repairs had been completed and that an appointment had been arranged for 22 January 2021 to rehang the bathroom radiator. The landlord also informed the resident that due to the Covid-19 pandemic planned works were currently on hold, but that it would continue to carry out repairs as required. The landlord made no reference to the status of the complaint.
The resident then made several more telephone calls to this Service to state her dissatisfaction with the quality of the completed work and how the complaint was being handled. This Service wrote to the landlord again on 2 March 2021 and asked it to provide a complaint response. The landlord replied on 3 March 2021, it provided a copy of the 20 January 2021 email it had sent to the resident and stated that it was in contact with the resident regarding the repairs under progress.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 5 March 2021. It provided an update on the current status of the work and when/how it expected the outstanding work to be completed. It also informed her that it would provide a further update within ten working days. This email was titled “Stage One Acknowledgement of Complaint”. However, the email made no further mention of the complaint or when a stage one response would be provided.
The resident called this Service again on 25 March 2020 and stated that she had yet to receive a complaint response. This Service wrote to the landlord and asked it to provide a complaint response within the next five working days. The Ombudsman noted the previous times it had written to the landlord and advised that continued failure to provide a response or meet the deadline may result in a Complaint Handling Failure Order (CHFO) being issued.
The landlord replied on 25 March 2020. It informed this Service that it had contacted the resident on 5 March 2021 to acknowledge the complaint and that it had been in regular contact with the resident via email and telephone.
On 26 March 2021 the resident called the landlord and requested £5,000 compensation for the inconvenience that the matter had caused and the increase in her electric costs. The landlord’s notes of the call stated that it asked the resident to provide it with copies of her electric bills.
On 29 March 2021 this Service wrote to the Landlord. We acknowledged the correspondence we had received from the landlord on 5 and 25 March 2021and asked it to provide a stage one complaint response to the resident by 5 April 2021 including the following information:
1. The complaint stage.
2. The outcome of the complaint.
3. The reasons for any decisions made.
4. The details of any remedy offered to put things right.
5. Details of any outstanding actions.
6. Details of how to escalate the matter if dissatisfied.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 1 April 2021 and provided an update on the status of the work. It informed her that:
1. The OT had recommended work to the toilet and bathroom. Appointments will be made to complete the work once the aids and adaptations had been received.
2. The appointment to overhaul/replace the extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom on 29 March 2021 did not go ahead as no access to the property was provided. This had been rebooked for 8 April 2021.
3. A work order had been raised to replace/repair the front door and the contractor would be in touch with the resident to book an appointment.
4. The resident would be in contact within five working days to arrange work to remedy the growth of damp and mould.
5. Scaffolding had been erected on 1 April 2021 and an inspection of the roof will be undertaken on 12 April 2021.
While the landlord’s email stated that it was sent in response to this Service’s letter on 29 March 2021, the landlord made no reference to the status of the complaint, nor did it provide any of the requested information.
The landlord wrote to the resident again on 19 April 2021. It informed her that the front entrance door did not require to be replaced and that it would raise internally her request to be compensated for the effect the damp and mould has had on her health.
The landlord wrote on 4 May 2021 and provided an update on the repairs. It explained that it had received the specialist toilet and that its contractor would be in touch to arrange a date for installation. It would also be in contact to arrange dates to install thermal boarding to the bedroom wall, work to the front entrance door and to replaster then paint the wall under the back bedroom window. It also confirmed that the gutters had been cleared, the back bedroom wall repointed, and that an electrician would attend on 2 July 2021 to reinstate the socket in the back bedroom. Finally, it said that the new radiator for the bedroom had arrived and would be installed when the thermo boarding had been completed.
A further update was sent by the landlord on 15 May 2021. It informed the resident that appointment to install the thermal boarding had been arranged for 1 June 2021, a plumber would attend on 7 June 2021 to repair the shower and it would be in contact within five working days to arrange an appointment for the front entrance door.
On 26 May 2021, the resident called this Service and stated that she had still to receive a stage one response. This Service wrote to the landlord on 26 May 2021 and requested that a stage one response was provided to the resident within ten working days.
On 1 June 2021 the landlord confirmed appointments on 7 June 2021 for work in the bedroom and on 8 June 2021 for the kitchen and bathroom extractor fans. On 11 June 2021 it wrote again to confirm all bedroom work had been completed and appointment had been arranged for 14 June 2021 for the bedroom to be painted.
On 15 June 2021 the landlord wrote to the resident and provided a list of what work had been completed and what remained outstanding. It also confirmed that it would arrange for an operative to visit and remove all the remain waste left in the backyard.
On 21 June 2021 the resident called this service. She expressed her dissatisfaction with the quality of the completed work, stated that the landlord should pay £10,000 compensation in recognition of the effect the mould has had on her health, and informed this Service that the landlord had still not provided a stage one response.
This Service then wrote to the landlord on 21 June 2021. We provided a timeline of our correspondence with the resident between November 2020 and June 2021 and our attempts to get the landlord to provide a complaint response. This Service then noted that as per paragraph 9(b) of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, the landlord should “establish and maintain a complaints procedure in accordance with any good practice recommended by the Ombudsman” and that, as per the terms of the Complaint Handling Code, the landlord is expected to provide a complaint response at stage one within ten working days of a complaint being raised.
This Service then requested a full complaint response be provided by the landlord by 28 June 2021 or a CHFO may be issued and published.
The landlord called the resident to discuss the issues and then wrote to her on 22 June 2021. The landlord’s email was titled “Stage One Acknowledgement of Complaint” but made no other reference to the resident’s complaint. A copy of the email was also provided to this Service. The email first listed the completed working, stating that:
1. The specialist toilet had been installed.
2. The kitchen and bathroom extractor fans were both working correctly.
3. The wall underneath the bedroom window had been replastered and the bedroom repainted.
4. The flooring works had been completed.
5. The front entrance door had been repaired.
The landlord then listed the outstanding work and stated that:
1. The work to add thermal boarding to a bedroom had started and was still ongoing.
2. A plumber would attend on 13 July 2021 to fix the toilet flush.
3. An electrician would attend on 2 July 2021 to reinstate the socket in the back bedroom.
4. It would contact her in the next five working days to arrange an appointment to remove the chip board in the bedroom to allow the radiator pipes to be rerun.
5. Once the thermal boarding work had been completed, the room would be replastered, repainted and the radiator would be rehung
The landlord confirmed that following its telephone call with the resident that it had agreed to:
1. Review the quality of the repair to the front entrance door as the resident did not believe it was up to standard.
2. Renew the bedroom flooring when the thermal boarding work was completed.
3. Undertake an inspection of the work completed in the downstairs bathroom, kitchen and bedroom.
The landlord then addressed compensation. It noted that the resident had requested £14,000 compensation for the stress and anxiety caused the length of time it had taken for the work to be completed and the adverse effect on her health caused by the ongoing work. It informed the resident that it would consider her request for compensation once all work had been completed to her satisfaction.
This Service wrote to the landlord on 19 July 2021. We acknowledged receipt of the 22 June 2021 email and informed the landlord that in recent correspondence with the resident, she had stated that no agreement had been put in place to delay the stage one response until all work had been completed. This Service asked the landlord to provide a stage one response by 26 July 2021.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 19 July 2021. This email was almost exactly the same as the email it had sent on 22 June 2021. The only differences were that the work to the toilet flush, electrical socket and radiator pipework had been moved from the list of outstanding work to the list of completed work, and the email title had been changed to “Stage One Response of Complaint”.
The email made no other mention of the resident’s complaint, nor did it provide any information explain how the resident could request an escalation of the complaint if she was dissatisfied.
The resident called this Service on 21 July 2021 and requested to escalation the complaint. This Service passed on the resident’s request to the landlord and described the grounds for the request as:
1. She was dissatisfied with the length of time it had taken to complete the repairs and disputed that the list of completed repairs in the stage one response was correct.
2. The quality of the completed repairs was not up to standard.
3. The landlord had not yet finalised a compensation offer.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 29 July 2021 to confirm that the complaint had been escalated. The stage two complaint response was then sent on 19 August 2021.
The landlord provided a timeline of the work and noted that an appointment for a surveyor had been arranged for 28 August 2021 to inspect the completed work and confirm any outstanding work.
The landlord accepted that while there had been delays due to restrictions on its services due to the Covid-19 pandemic and national lockdowns, the resident still experienced unacceptable delays in the work being completed. It also noted that three appointments had not gone ahead and needed to be rebooked, and that the resident had experienced poor communication which had resulted in inconvenience as she had to chase the landlord for updates.
The landlord then apologised to the resident and offered £410 compensation, which it broke down as:
1. £150 for the inconvenience the matter had caused.
2. £150 for distress caused to the resident.
3. £50 for the time and effort from the resident in chasing the landlord for updates.
4. £60 for the three missed appointments.
The landlord concluded the response by informing the resident that she had exhausted its internal complaints process and advised her on the steps to take to bring her complaint to this Service should she remain dissatisfied.

Assessment and findings

How the landlord handled repairs at the property from January 2020 onwards

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
In its stage two complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that there were delays in completing the repairs at the property and that the resident had experienced distress and inconvenience due to its service failures relating to the repairs. It apologised and offered a total of £660 compensation for its service failures.
Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, 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.
The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging its mistakes. It put things right by apologising to the resident and awarding appropriate compensation. It looked to learn from its errors by raising internally how it responded to the complaint and identify areas where it could improve its service. The landlord’s internal correspondence showed that during the complaint it took on board the resident’s criticisms of its poor communication by providing more detailed updates on the status of the work and how it would resolve the outstanding repairs.
The compensation payment was made in line with the landlord’s compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (which is available on our website). This suggests a payment of £250 to £750 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration, but there may be no permanent impact on the complainant. As examples for when this level of payment should be considered, the guidance suggests:
1. A complainant repeatedly having to chase responses and seek correction of mistakes, necessitating unreasonable level of involvement by that complainant
2. Failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy – for example to address repairs; to respond to antisocial behaviour; to make adequate adjustments
In this case, it took several months and several, emails and telephone calls by the resident before the landlord started to provide regular updates on the status of the work. The landlord also accepted that the length of time it took to complete the work was not acceptable, the resident was without the use of her bathroom for four weeks and there were also three failed appointments. A payment of £660 (a £250 voucher and the £410 offered at stage two) is at the upper level of the suggested composition recommended for this type of service failure was therefore reasonable in the circumstances.
The resident requested the reimbursement of extra electricity costs caused by the use of temporary heating. The landlord request copies of the resident’s utility bills in order to assess the resident’s request, but no evidence has been supplied which showed that this was provided during the complaint process. It was therefore reasonable that the landlord did not take this into account when calculating its compensation offer.
The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding her health, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts as a personal injury claim. Thus, this report has not assessed the issue of the impact on her health and whether the landlord has considered this.
This is in line with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states that “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure”. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and how the landlord responded.
Therefore, for the reasons set out above, the landlord has made an offer of redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves this aspect of the complaint satisfactorily. The measures it took to redress what went wrong were proportionate to the impact that its failures had on the resident.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord did not follow its complaint policy at stage one. The resident raised a complaint on 24 August 2020. This was acknowledged by the landlord on 25 August, but a stage one complaint response was not provided until 19 July 2021: 11 months later.
Throughout this period, both the resident and this Service contacted the landlord and requested it provide a full complaint response at stage one. While the landlord did provide regular updates on the status of the repairs, no complaint response was provided. The landlord explained to the resident that it would not offer compensation until all work had been completed, however it did not provide an explanation why it delayed the stage one response.
It is the established view of this service that landlords should respond to complaints in a timely manner, and it is not necessary to wait for repairs to be completed before responding to a complaint. A complaint response can be issued whilst repairs are outstanding and compensation can be awarded for any delays which have taken place and which are expected, based on the proposed completion date for any outstanding repairs. If there are further delays after the landlord has issued its final complaint response, the landlord can issue a further response and consider whether to offer additional compensation for the further delays.
The stage one response sent on 19 July 2021 followed the same template as the emails the landlord had previously sent updating the resident of the progress of the repairs. The response did not address the elements of the complaint described the landlord in its 25 August 2020 acknowledgment, nor did it give the resident any information on how to progress the complaint should she remain dissatisfied.
The stage two response did address the outstanding issues the resident had highlighted and also provided information on how to progress the complaint. The response was also provided within the landlord’s timescales given in its complaint policy.
However, the stage two response did not address the delays at stage one, explain to the resident why it took 11 months to provide a stage one response, or apologise to the resident. The landlord did provide £50 compensation for the resident’s time and trouble in chasing them for updates, this was described in the response as compensation for “time chasing [the landlord] to get an update regarding having the repair resolved”. Delays in the complaint process were not considered when the landlord calculated its compensation.
Therefore, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling and in order to fully resolve the complaint, further compensation is warranted in reignition of this failure.
As previously stated, the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance suggests a payment of £250 to £750 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration. Further examples for when this level of payment should be considered include:
1. Repeated failure to meaningfully engage with the substance of the complaint, or failing to address all relevant aspects of complaint, leading to considerable delay in resolving complaint
2. Significant failures to follow complaint procedure, escalate the matter or signpost the complainant
Therefore, in order to fully resolve the complaint, the landlord is ordered to pay an additional £350 compensation in recognition of the 11-month delay in providing a stage one complaint response, and the inconvenience that this caused the resident.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident in respect of how it handled repairs at the property which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves this element of the complaint.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.
The issues occurring prior to January 2020 are outside the jurisdiction of this Service to consider, for the reasons stated in paragraphs 3 to 5 of this report.

Reasons

The landlord recognised the inconvenience caused to the resident by delays in completing repairs, and the distress that this had caused to her. It apologised and awarded compensation proportionate to the effect of these failures on her.
The landlord did not properly follow its complaint policy at stage one, and it took 11 months from when the complaint was raised before a stage one complaint response was sent to the resident. The stage two response did not address the delays at stage one nor take them into account when calculating the compensation offer. Therefore, further compensation is warranted to fully resolve the complaint.

Orders

For the service failure and reasons set out above, the landlord is ordered to pay to the resident £350. This payment should be made within four weeks of the date of this report. The landlord should update this Service when payment has been made. This compensation award is in addition to the compensation already offered by the landlord during its complaint process.