Optivo (now Southern Housing) (202220933)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220933

Optivo (now Southern Housing)

25 August 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. response to the resident’s reports about repair issues in the bathroom;
2. complaints handling.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant at the property of the landlord. The landlord is a registered provider of social housing.
The landlord inspected the resident’s property on 3 December 2021. It identified repairs needed to her bathroom ceiling and tiling.
Between December 2021 and April 2022, the landlord carried out repairs to fix a leak from the bath, seal the toilet, replace tiles, install a temporary light, and plaster the ceiling.
The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 10 May 2022. She was unhappy with the length of time it had taken to complete the repairs in the bathroom. She highlighted that several repairs remained outstanding. She was also unhappy that she had needed to take several days off work to provide access for the repairs and that two appointments were either not attended or unsuccessful. The resident wanted the landlord to provide her with a detailed schedule of repairs with an accurate timeframe for completion.
The landlord explained to the resident on 19 May 2022, that “the works weren’t handled correctly and some jobs weren’t reported as needing further work.” It confirmed that it had booked repairs for 7 June 2022 to fix the bath panel, address a leak, and reinstate the light. Further repairs were also booked for 13 June 2022, to address the ceiling and flooring.
When the landlord attended on 7 June 2022, it found that it could not reinstate the light as the ceiling work was unfinished. The resident subsequently raised her complaint again. She had already highlighted that it was not practical to attempt the light repair prior to the completion of the ceiling works and reiterated her dissatisfaction with the prolonged delay in resolving the repairs.
The landlord provided its stage one response on 12 July 2022. It apologised for the delay in completing the repairs. It confirmed that it had rebooked the light repair for 15 July 2022 and offered her £35 compensation for the delays.
The resident escalated her complaint on 26 July 2022. She did not consider that the landlord had not fully explained the reasons for the delay. She was also unhappy that damage had been caused by workers to her bath and tiling, and that the standard of the work was unsatisfactory. The resident considered the compensation offered was insufficient and wanted the landlord to provide her with a schedule of work.
The landlord provided its final response to the resident on 1 September 2022. It confirmed that it had carried out an inspection of the work and raised further jobs to remedy damage caused by its workers and complete outstanding repairs. The landlord increased its offer of compensation to £135.

Assessment and findings

Bathroom repairs

The tenancy agreement confirms that the landlord is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the structure and exterior of the property. It is also responsible for the repair and maintenance of the installations within the property for the provision of sanitation and electricity. The landlord therefore had a repair responsibility in relation to the bathroom, the light, and the bath.
The landlord’s repair responsibilities webpage states that “where we provide any furniture, fixed floor coverings, or equipment as part of the tenancy, we will aim to keep them in good repair and working order.” It was not disputed that the landlord installed the vinyl flooring and tiling in the bathroom and therefore it was responsible for any repairs to these.
The landlord’s responsive repairs policy confirms that it will ‘make good’ any decoration when a repair affects the decoration in the property. This policy also states that, for non-emergency repairs, it “aims to complete all repairs in one visit and… as little time as possible.” This policy does not provide a timeframe for the completion of a non-emergency repair; however, the Ombudsman would expect a landlord to complete a routine, non-emergency repair within a calendar month. This is in line with the standard across the industry.
The Ombudsman accepts that repairs may exceed this timeframe when they are particularly complex, require more than one trade, or specialist equipment. In such cases, the landlord would be expected to provide an accurate timeframe to the resident for the completion of the repair and provide them with updates if delays arise. The landlord should make reasonable efforts to manage the resident’s expectations to minimise any inconvenience they may experience, or any excess expenditure of time and effort in chasing the repair while incomplete.
The landlord first identified that repairs were required to the bathroom ceiling and tiling on 3 December 2021. It first attended to repair the ceiling on 17 March 2021, approximately four months later, and found that an electrician was required to make the light safe to facilitate ceiling repairs. This was not done until 28 April 2022, a further one month later, and the job was recorded as “done” on 30 April 2022.
The ceiling repair was not completed, however, which led the resident to raise a complaint with the landlord on 10 May 2022. Only then did the landlord acknowledge that the ceiling surface was not finished as it had not been sanded down correctly. This required a further attendance on 13 June 2022, and its inspection on 1 September 2022 found that painting was still required to make good the repair. This was completed on 15 October 2022, when the landlord also repaired the flooring, and damage to the tiles and bath caused by its workers.
The repairs were not fully completed until 16 December 2022, after a further inspection found that the re-tiling required further work. Therefore, from the initial inspection on 3 December 2021, the landlord took approximately one year to complete the repairs identified. The leak under the bath, and connected repairs to the bath panel, tiling and flooring, were reported on 17 March 2022. The landlord took an unreasonable period of approximately nine months to finalise these repairs.
The landlord also failed to manage the resident’s expectations and communicate with her effectively about the repairs. There was no evidence of the landlord communicating with her between its inspection on 3 December 2021, and her raising her complaint on 10 May 2022, to manage her expectations of how long the work would take.
After it scheduled an electrician for 28 April 2022 to make the light fitting safe, it then made an appointment for 7 June 2022 to reinstate the light; this was a week before the plasterer was due to return to complete the ceiling repair. The resident questioned this decision in her email to the landlord on 19 May 2022. However, there was no evidence of its response until after the electrician’s attendance, when it was found that it was not possible to complete the electrical work until the plasterer had finished the ceiling. This was a failure by the landlord to manage the works effectively, leading to inconvenience and frustration for the resident. This was also a failure to communicate with the resident and consider her concerns.
The resident requested in her complaint requests for the landlord to provide an explanation for why the repairs had taken so long to complete. It briefly explained to her on 19 May 2022, that the repairs were not handled correctly and that follow on works had not been raised. It also apologised for this. However, its complaint responses did not include a sufficiently detailed explanation as to why the works were not handled correctly. This would have further damaged the tenant-landlord relationship by reducing the resident’s confidence in the landlord’s repairs service.
In the circumstances, the landlord’s delays amount to maladministration. While the landlord made some recognition of the impact caused to the resident and offered £135 compensation in its final response, this was not proportionate to the scale of the failings identified. In recognition of the significant length of time taken to complete the repairs and the landlord’s poor management and communication about these, compensation of £600 has been ordered. This order replaces the landlord’s earlier offer of £135. This is to recognise the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident while work remained outstanding in her bathroom, and also her expenditure of time and effort in pursuing the landlord to complete the work.

Complaints handling

The landlord’s complaints resolution policy provides for a three stage complaints process. Prior to its formal investigation, there is an initial informal complaint stage where it will attempt to resolve the complaint within 10 working days before escalating it to a formal stage one complaint.
At stage one, the landlord should provide its written response to the resident within 10 working days. At the final stage, the landlord should provide its response within 10 working days of carrying out a panel review.
The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaints Handling Code (the Code) sets out that an initial stage preceding the formal complaints process is inappropriate. This is because this creates undue delay in the resolution of a resident’s complaint.
It was evident that the landlord initially considered the resident’s complaint as an informal complaint; however, it did not confirm this to her. After she made her complaint to its complaints team on 10 May 2022, it did not provide a timely acknowledgement. The resident was therefore required to chase the landlord for an acknowledgment on 18 May 2022, before it responded the next day to confirm it had made appointments to address her repair issues. It was unreasonable that the landlord did not make it clear to the resident at what stage it was considering her complaint, or provide timescales for a resolution.
It would have been a reasonable expectation on the part of the resident to expect her complaint to be treated as a formal complaint. Her communication with the landlord on 10 May 2022 was titled “new complaint” and this was sent to the landlord’s complaints team. It was unreasonable that she was required to chase the landlord on 18 May 2022, re-raise her complaint on 7 June 2022, and chase the landlord again on 10 June 2022 for its acknowledgement, before it provided a formal stage one response to her on 12 July 2022. This was 43 working days after her initial complaint, which was unreasonable in the circumstances.
This delay amounted to service failure in the circumstances for which an amount of £100 compensation is ordered to recognise the resident’s inconvenience, and time and trouble expended in progressing the complaint.
It is noted that the landlord’s current complaints procedure now requires the resident’s agreement to open an informal complaint or “service dissatisfaction”. Going forwards, the landlord should ensure that it adheres to this requirement for agreement from the residentto prevent any undue delay in the resolution of complaints.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord for its response to the resident’s reports about repair issues in the bathroom.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord for its complaints handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the resident £600 compensation for its handling of the repairs; this is inclusive of the £135 it already offered her.
2. Pay the resident £100 for its handling of the complaint.
3. Carry out another post-inspection of the bathroom to confirm that all repairs are completed satisfactorily.
4. Provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied with the above orders.

Recommendations

The landlord is recommended to ensure it seeks residents’ consent to proceed with informal complaints, in accordance with its current complaints procedure.