Call for Evidence on housing maintenance now open! Respond by 25 October 2024. Submit evidence online.

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (202102425)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202102425

Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited

3 May 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 handling of repairs to the resident’s external doors and windows.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the property, living in a two-bedroom house, owned by the landlord. The landlord’s records show the resident reported damage to her front and back entrance doors and bedroom windows on 7 January 2021. The resident informed the landlord that the broken doors and windows had allowed rain to penetrate and caused continual water damage to her carpet which resulted in rust. The resident followed up with the landlord regarding the repairs to her doors and windows in January and February 2022.
  2. On 3 March 2021, the resident made a formal complaint regarding the delay to the repairs to her doors and windows, which had been previously approved on 14 January 2021. The resident stated that the landlord’s contractors had visited the property and stated that both the doors and windows were beyond repair and required replacing – yet the replacements remained outstanding.
  3. The resident referred her complaint to this Service on 29 April 2021, as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of the repairs and stated it had not responded to her complaint. The landlord issued a stage two complaint response on 2 June 2021, after contact from this Service. In its final response the landlord acknowledged there had been delays in resolving the issue due to its contractor failing to undertake the appropriatzae repairs on its first visit. It advised that a senior contractor had inspected the property on 13 May 2021 and issued a report of outstanding repairs to be completed. It stated that the repair to the hinges of the resident’s windows were completed on 13 May 2021 and renewal to the doors would be confirmed at a later date. The landlord awarded £75 for time and trouble and £75 for service failure – a total of £150 compensation.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord again on 30 July 2021 regarding outstanding repairs to her doors. The Landlord issued a separate stage one response regarding this complaint on 26 August 2021. It stated the replacement doors had been included in the planned works of the financial year of 2021/2022 and that manufacturing had a timescale of 6 – 12 weeks. It advised that it could not provide an exact date of delivery and that it would contact the resident directly when the doors were ready. It apologised for the length of time it took to reply and awarded the resident £20 for time and trouble in pursuing the complaint.
  5. The landlord issued a further complaint response on 11 October 2021. It outlined its failings to communicate with the resident and meet its usual customer service standards, and provided a breakdown of the outstanding repairs. It stated that the backdoor would be fitted on 11 October 2021 and stated that the front door would need to be re-ordered to meet the resident’s initial preference of door. It stated that the resident’s windows would be installed in the 2021/2022 financial year and a fitting would take place on 12 October 2021. The landlord awarded the resident £250 in recognition of time and trouble, £250 to address service failure regarding repair timescales, £150 for poor complaint handling and £200 for previous complaints – a total of £850 compensation.
  6. The resident requested this Service to investigate the outstanding repairs to her doors and windows, and stated her desired outcome is for the outstanding repairs to be completed.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident raised concerns to the landlord regarding repairs to her bathroom and kitchen. These matters were not brought to the Ombudsman as part of the resident’s complaint to our service and will therefore not be included in this investigation. If the resident wants to pursue the complaint about the bathroom and kitchen, she can contact the Ombudsman separately for advice on how to progress her complaint.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s external doors and windows.

  1. The landlord’s repairs guide states that it is responsible for repairs and replacements to doors (internal and external), door furniture (internal and external) and windows (excluding window locks). It states it will attend to routine repairs within 28 calendar days and major routine repairs within three months or as part of its planned works programme. It considers major planned works to be kitchen replacements, boiler replacements and window and external door replacements.
  2. The resident made her initial complaint to the landlord regarding the repairs to her doors and windows on 7 January 2021. The resident then followed up the repairs three times, before raising a formal complaint on 3 March 2021. The evidence indicates that the delays to the replacement and repairs to the doors and windows were due to administrative issues with the landlord’s contractors. An internal communication log from the landlord on 1 Feb 2021, states the installation of the resident’s doors would be delayed to the next financial year, due to Covid-19 implications on supply and demand. It should be noted that the landlord is not at fault for delays due to issues beyond its control such as delays caused by the effect of the pandemic on the landlord’s and the manufacturer’s staffing levels and the availability of materials. However, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have informed the resident of its reasons for the delay, apologised and set new timescales at this stage. However, there is no evidence that it did so.
  3. The landlord issued a stage two complaint response on 2 June 2021, after the Ombudsman requested it to issue a response to the resident. It apologised for the delays to the repairs and offered new timescales for repairs to the bedroom window and doors. The landlord advised it would send its surveyor to post–inspect the repairs to ensure it had been completed to a satisfactory standard. The landlord awarded £75 for time and trouble and £75 for service failure.  It was appropriate for the landlord to apologise for its delay in response and compensate the resident for any distress and inconvenience this delay caused her.
  4. The landlord’s compensation policy states it awards £51-£150 for a medium failure of service, which it defines as several errors being made or when a service/repair is repeatedly not resolved or fixed. Its compensation policy also states it awards £51-£151 of compensation for medium failure for time and trouble to compensate a resident for time taken to complain as a result of service failure.
  5. The landlord issued a stage one complaint response on 26 August 2021. This was six days outside of its published timescale. The landlord’s complaints policy states it would acknowledge stage one complaints within 5 working days and provide the resident with expected timelines and an assigned complaint handler. The policy states the landlord would issue a stage one response within 10 days of acknowledging the resident’s complaint. It also advises that if more time is required for a stage one response, it would agree a new response time and update the resident weekly beyond the initial 10 days. It was appropriate for the landlord to apologise for the delay and compensate the resident for this in line with its policy.
  6. In considering a landlord’s response to a complaint, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord acted in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  7. The landlord awarded the resident £250 in recognition of time and trouble, £250 to address service failure regarding repair timescales, £150 for poor complaint handling and £200 for previous complaints – a total of £850 compensation.
  8. It was appropriate for the landlord to compensate the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by delays and poor communication regarding the repairs. The landlord’s compensation policy explains that it can offer £151-£350 in its highest category for time and trouble for cases where there has been a high volume of contact needed from the resident to resolve the issue. The policy also states it can offer £151-£350 in its highest category for failure of service where there have been repeated failings in the service provided to the resident causing a high impact to the resident and their standard of living. The policy states the landlord can award a maximum of £150 for poor complaint handling in cases where timeframes in its policy have not been met, in cases of poor communication and failure to respond to correspondence.
  9. The Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance (published on our website) sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. Awards in the range of £700 and above are in the highest category of compensation awarded by this Service. Remedies in this range are used in recognition of maladministration or severe maladministration by a landlord that has had a severe long-term impact on the resident, such as: long stay in temporary accommodation due to mishandling of repairs and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
  10. It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge and apologise for its delay in responding to the resident’s complaint, and the inconvenience the resident may have experienced due to its poor communication. In addition, the response shows that the aspects of the resident’s complaint, and the failures of the landlord have been thoroughly examined in order to provide an appropriate response that adequately set out any steps it had taken to resolve the issue. It was appropriate for the landlord to review its delivery of services in order to better serve its customers. This willingness to investigate itself and improve upon its mistakes is an example of appropriate action by the landlord in response to a complaint. The landlord appropriately completed some of the repairs and set out timescales for the completion of the remaining repairs. This is in line with what the Ombudsman would expect to see from a landlord such as: evidence of specific actions it had taken to resolve the issue, appointment dates for the repairs, any relevant findings and a conclusion on whether the correct process had been followed.
  11. According to the evidence provided, responsive repairs to the resident’s doors and bedroom window have now been completed. However, planned works to the resident’s windows remain outstanding, as the resident is yet to allow access to the property for the asbestos survey which needs to take place before the window works. The Ombudsman is not questioning the resident’s reasons for not allowing access. However, it is reasonable for the landlord to require an asbestos survey where appropriate, for health and safety reasons before carrying out repairs. The Ombudsman would not order the landlord to carry out repairs without such a survey, where it has been identified that the survey is required. The Ombudsman advises the resident to allow access for the survey in order for the planned works to proceed.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord pays the resident the £850 previously offered, if it has not done so already, as its offer recognised genuine elements of service failure and the Ombudsman’s finding of reasonable redress is based on this compensation being paid.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord carries out the planned works to the resident’s windows, subject to the resident allowing access for the landlord’s contractors to carry out the asbestos survey and subsequent works.