Southern Housing (202347452)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202347452

Southern Housing Group Limited

30 August 2024

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 handling of the resident’s:
1. Request for adaptations.
2. Reports of required repairs.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s:
1. Handling of the management home move.
2. Complaint handling.
3. Record keeping.

Background

The resident has been an assured tenant of the property, a 2 bedroom flat, since 2007. The resident is a wheelchair user and lives with her daughter, who is her carer. The landlord is a housing association, which owns and manages the property.
On 22 February 2018, the landlord sent the resident an email confirming a telephone call it had with her on the same day. It stated the resident had recently called 6 times to get updates on various outstanding repairs. It confirmed it was to complete the following repairs:
1. Renew the laminate flooring in the property following a flood of foul water into the lower part of the flat.
2. Renew the bathroom floor with a polysafe floor covering.
3. Renew 2 internal 30 minute fire doors, including fixtures and fittings.
4. Ease and adjust 2 bedroom doors, including overhauling the door handles and locks and replacing if required.
5. Overhaul the cupboard door to the water tank.
6. Replace the bath panel.
7. Test the electrics, renew 2 double sockets to the bedroom and refix the doorbell.
8. Box in the pipework to the lounge, stairway and bedrooms, including painting the new boxing with white gloss.
The local authority’s occupational therapist emailed the landlord on 14 December 2021, attaching a report regarding the resident’s living situation. They said:
1. The resident’s access in her current property was restricted to the living room and kitchen, as they were on the same floor. The other rooms in the property were set across 2 other floors, both of which had 7 stairs leading to them. The resident was unable to navigate the stairs because of her restricted mobility.
2. They recommended that the resident should be moved to a fully wheelchair accessible property to maximise safety and independence.
3. The resident had asked for a bathroom with windows for ventilation, as she had problems with her breathing and there was a risk of fainting. The resident would benefit from having a wet room, including a wall mounted fold-up padded shower seat with armrests and leg support.
4. They recommended a wheelchair accessible kitchen with electric-operated height adjustable kitchen worktops, sink and integrated hob. This was to accommodate the resident and her able–bodied daughter, both of whom would be using the kitchen to cook.
5. The resident asked to be rehoused in the area of Dulwich only. She also only wanted a property on the ground floor, including a ground floor flat or bungalow, because she had heart palpitations and panic attacks in lifts.
The landlord acknowledged the email from the occupational therapist and confirmed it would pass the documents to the correct department. It later called the resident on 2 March 2022 and completed a priority move request form with her, before passing this to its priority move panel for consideration.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 14 March 2022, confirming its panel had reviewed her case and agreed a move on medical grounds. It told the resident it had added her to the list for a medical move but could not provide a timescale for how long the process would take.
The landlord’s contractor emailed the landlord on 9 March 2023 stating it had open repair orders at the property but the resident was difficult to contact and would not allow access when they attempted to do the works. The contractor did not provide the landlord with any specific examples of the resident refusing access.
The contractor emailed the landlord again on 11 April 2023 stating it had attended that day to replace the bathroom and kitchen fans. It said it was unable to complete the work because the replacement fans were a different brand to the existing fans and the resident would not accept the replacements for this reason.
On 21 November 2023, the resident reported that her bathroom light was broken. She called the landlord again on 27 November 2023 and raised a stage 1 complaint because:
1. The landlord had not repaired her broken bathroom light. It had told her an operative would be attending on 24 November 2023 but this did not happen.
2. The contractor had provided conflicting reasons about why it had not kept the appointment on 24 November 2023.
3. The resident had been discussing this with an agent of the contractor, who had said they “could not be bothered” continuing to speak with the resident. This operative had then transferred her call to the landlord.
The landlord emailed the resident on 29 November 2023 confirming it had raised a new case for the outstanding repairs and that this was with its contractor’s operations manager. It sent the resident another email on 4 December 2023, in which it acknowledged the complaint and confirmed it would respond by 18 December 2023.
The landlord’s surveyor emailed its repairs team on 9 January 2024 asking for urgent jobs to be raised to repair the resident’s bathroom light and a leak from her toilet pan connector.
The surveyor attended the property on 17 January 2024. He reported that:
1. The resident had told him the landlord had agreed to replace the kitchen 2 years earlier, including the flooring, following an upsurge of waste from the kitchen sink.
2. However, he had spoken to the surveyor who previously attended, and they had confirmed no such agreement was reached.
3. He had also inspected the kitchen during his visit and could see no reason to replace it. There were no notable signs of damage or major wear.
4. There was a small section of the laminate flooring in the lounge which was damaged by water ingress.
5. The resident claimed the landlord had previously agreed to replace the laminate flooring in the lounge and hallway. However, he spoke to the previous surveyor who said this was not agreed.
6. He had raised a work order with the contractor to replace the bathroom light and to repair the toilet.
7. The resident wanted the landlord to overhaul all the windows in the property due to issues with draughts.
8. The resident had asked for a larger radiator in her bedroom. However, the current radiator was suitable for the size of the room.
On 26 January 2024, the landlord’s contractor said the resident had been refusing access for the works. The landlord emailed the resident about this on 1 February 2024. The resident denied this and said the contractor had not attended when agreed.
On 6 March 2024, the landlord emailed the resident confirming its contractor would attend on 7 March 2024 to complete an inspection. It also confirmed it would:
1. Replace the light in the bathroom, as well as install a new flush button and pan connector on the toilet.
2. Inspect all windows to ensure they were free from draughts.
3. Replace the laminate flooring in the lounge. It would also measure the flooring in the 2 bedrooms but there was no guarantee it would replace this flooring.
4. Replace the kitchen door with a fire door.
5. Inspect the extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom and replace if necessary.
6. Inspect the shower head and replace if required.
7. Instruct its gas contractor to attend and inspect the central heating system.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 19 March 2024, in which it:
1. Said its contractor had arranged appointments to fix the broken bathroom light and toilet leak on 24 November 2023, 5 December 2023 and 5 January 2024. However, there was no evidence the contractor had attended these appointments.
2. Said the contractor had attended on 22 November 2023 and fitted dense tape to the toilet as a temporary repair for the leak. The contractor had then closed the job on 5 February 2024 without completing a permanent repair.
3. Confirmed it had not received a report from the occupational therapist recommending a bathroom adaptation. A caseworker would contact her to discuss this matter further when they returned from annual leave after 1 April 2024.
4. Reiterated the schedule of works it had already confirmed to the resident by email on 6 March 2024.
5. Said its gas contractor had completed an inspection on 8 March 2024 and would be attending on 9 April 2024 to install new radiators in the property.
6. Stated it was awaiting a quotation of the cost of the works from its contractor following its inspection. It would progress the works once it received this.
7. Confirmed it was upholding her complaint and offered £250 compensation, comprising:
  1. £60 for the delays in completing the repairs.
  2. £40 for the failed appointments on 24 November 2023 and 5 January 2024.
  3. £50 for the complaint handling delay.
  4. £100 for her inconvenience, time and trouble.
8. Asked the resident to let it know if she wanted to accept the compensation or escalate the complaint to stage 2.
The resident spoke with the landlord’s area service manager on 20 March 2024. It was discussed that:
1. The resident expected the landlord to:
  1. Repair the toilet and bathroom light as emergency repairs within 24 hours.
  2. Refix her shower to the wall. This had been damaged by a contractor falling into it.
  3. Repair or replace the bathtub, which had also been broken by the contractor.
  4. Replace the flooring throughout the property.
  5. Replace the extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen.
  6. Ensure there were working radiators throughout the property.
  7. Replace her kitchen cabinets, sink and worktop.
  8. Check the plumbing work under the kitchen sink and cabinets.
  9. Check and repair the windows throughout the property due to draughts.
  10. Replace a broken window glass pane.
2. The landlord would not necessarily agree to all the repairs requested by the resident as its recent surveys suggested some of this work was not required.
3. The landlord did not have the technical drawings and specifications required from the occupational therapist to complete any adaptations in the property. The landlord told the resident it needed drawings, measurements and details of the specific components she needed to aid her before it could consider any works. It told her to return to the occupational therapist to obtain this and it could then revisit it.
4. The landlord would only undertake adaptation works up to the value of £1,000. It was likely the adaptations required by the resident would exceed this, so she would likely need to obtain a disabled facilities grant from the local authority.
5. The resident could speak to the landlord’s empty homes and lettings team if she wished to have an update regarding her management home move request.
The resident emailed the landlord on 15 April 2024. She said:
1. She had been waiting since 19 November 2023 for the landlord to repair the toilet and bathroom light. Her daughter was injured in a fall in the bathroom because of the disrepair.
2. The landlord’s contractor had not completed scheduled appointments.
3. The ongoing problems had caused her and her daughter significant distress and inconvenience.
4. The compensation offered by the landlord was not enough to address all the issues and resulting distress and inconvenience.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 16 April 2024 and confirmed it would respond by 15 May 2024. It sent the response on 17 May 2024, in which it said:
1. Its contractor had attended on 18 April 2024 and attempted to install replacement extractor fans. The resident had refused this work because she did not like the appearance of the new fans, which were slightly larger and more powerful than her existing fans. It was sorry the resident did not like the appearance of the fans but it was important she allow the contractor to complete this work. The contractor would contact her again to agree a new date for this work.
2. Its contractor had attended on 4 April 2024 and overhauled all the windows in the property. The contractor made no recommendations for any follow on works.
3. There was no evidence it had approved a kitchen replacement for the resident, and its surveyor had confirmed this was not required on a recent visit.
4. It agreed to replace the laminate flooring in the living room, which was slightly damaged by water ingress. However, its surveyor had confirmed there was no need to replace any of the other flooring in the property.
5. It had only received a rehousing assessment report and a change of circumstances report from the occupational therapist. It had not received a technical specification for any required adaptations. The resident should contact her GP for another referral to the occupational therapist so she could obtain this. Following this, she may need to apply for a disabled facilities grant from the local authority.
6. It had asked its contractor to contact the resident to agree a date to overhaul her internal doors in the bedrooms and bathroom.
7. It would complete the following by 14 June 2024:
  1. Confirm a date for the extractor fans to be fitted.
  2. Confirm a date for a quote to be provided to replace the laminate flooring.
  3. Confirm a date to overhaul the internal doors in the bedrooms and bathroom.
8. It was upholding her complaint due to the repair and complaint handling delays she had faced. It was increasing its offer of compensation from £250 to £685, comprising:
  1. £15 for the failure to follow its process regarding the floor replacement and door overhaul.
  2. £60 for the missed appointments on 24 November 2023, 5 January 2024 and 18 January 2024.
  3. £60 for the repair delays, as offered at stage 1.
  4. £100 for the “unsatisfactory complaint handling”.
  5. £450 for the resident’s inconvenience.
9. The resident could bring her complaint to this Service if she remained dissatisfied.
The resident duly made her complaint to this Service on 29 May 2024.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for adaptations

The occupational therapist’s report did not recommend any adaptations to the resident’s existing property. Rather, it confirmed the resident’s medical needs had changed and recommended a home move to a fully wheelchair accessible property containing disabled showering facilities and height adjustable kitchen worktops.
The evidence seen shows that the landlord provided the correct advice to the resident when she asked about adaptations to her existing property. Namely, that the occupational therapist had provided a rehousing assessment and change of circumstances report only. The landlord correctly told the resident to return to the occupational therapist to obtain technical specifications for any recommended adaptations to the existing property.
As there is no evidence to suggest the landlord acted incorrectly or misadvised the resident, the Ombudsman finds no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for an adaptation.

The landlord’s handling of the management home move

Section 4.2 of the landlord’s ‘housing options and lettings’ policy says it may be able to offer a resident a management move to one of its homes, subject to availability, if they have “an evidenced need to move due to medical needs, which includes mental health, which make the home inaccessible and unsafe”. The landlord’s management panel handles applications of this nature.
Section 3.37 of the landlord’s ‘management move procedure’ says that, within 10 working days of receiving all needed supporting documents to evidence the resident’s need to move, it will complete an assessment with all necessary information needed for its management move panel to make a decision.
It took the landlord almost 3 months from when it received the occupational therapist’s report before it contacted the resident and completed the assessment form for the panel’s consideration. We have seen no evidence to explain what caused this delay, but this was far outside the timescale required under the landlord’s procedure.
Section 4.6 of the procedure says that, when the panel approves a request, a caseworker from the landlord will contact the resident to advise them:
1. Of the outcome and any conditions to being approved.
2. That they will be the resident’s point of contact and will keep them updated at least every 2 months.
3. That the resident can contact the landlord at any time if any of their circumstances change.
We have seen no evidence the landlord contacted the resident in line with section 4.6 of its procedure. The landlord’s notes show it provided no updates to the resident aside from contacting her on 2 March 2022 to complete the form and sending her the letter on 14 March 2022. The lack of updates led to the resident and the occupational therapist contacting the landlord several times between 23 November 2021 and 22 February 2022 to query the progress of the application.
We have also seen no evidence the landlord has regularly updated the resident in the 30 months since it approved her application. The landlord told the resident on 20 March 2024 that she could contact its homes and lettings team for an update. However, this was contrary to the procedure, which states the landlord is to regularly and proactively update the resident.
Due to the failure to follow its procedure, resulting in delays and no updates being provided to the resident, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the management home move.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of required repairs

Section 4.1 of the landlord’s responsive repairs policy defines an emergency repair as “anything causing immediate risk to the health, safety, and security of any occupants and/or visitors to your home, or causing immediate damage to a property’s structure, fixtures and/or fittings”. Section 4.2 of the policy says the landlord will complete work to make any emergency issues safe within 6 hours of the report. It confirms it will return as soon as possible after this to complete a permanent repair.
It can be seen from the evidence that the resident reported that the bathroom light was not working on 21 November 2023. She also reported the leak from the toilet on 5 December 2023. These repairs fitted the landlord’s definition of an emergency repair, particularly in light of the resident’s disability.
It is not certain on which date the landlord completed these emergency repairs due to poor record keeping, but the resident said in her stage 2 request on 15 April 2024 that these repairs were still outstanding. The landlord’s contractors attended several times between 16 April 2024 and 19 April 2024 to complete works, but the precise details of the works are unclear from the records. The resident confirmed to this Service on 21 May 2024 that her toilet and bathroom light were no longer in disrepair at that time, so it is likely the contractors completed these works between 16 April 2024 and 19 April 2024. This meant the resident was waiting 5 months for the emergency repairs. This was a significant health and safety risk the landlord left unresolved for this time, and the resident said her daughter slipped on some water from the leak in the dark bathroom during this period and injured herself.
The landlord also raised an emergency repair to install barrel bolt locks on the rear door in the resident’s daughter’s bedroom on 5 September 2022. Its records show it completed this job on 13 November 2023, which was 14 months later.
Section 5.1 of the responsive repairs policy says that, if a repair is not an emergency, the landlord will arrange an appointment for “as soon as possible and at a time that suits you (the resident)”. The evidence seen shows the landlord agreed to complete many repairs for the resident in early 2018 (a full list of these is outlined paragraph 4 of this report). The landlord took no action on these repairs for several years. It later revisited the repairs because the resident raised the issues again. After further surveyor inspections, it confirmed some of the repairs were not required.
The landlord’s records show it also raised a repair for the kitchen floor on 7 January 2022. It noted at the time that the kitchen flooring was “damaged due to several floods in the property”. The landlord raised another repair on 14 February 22 saying it needed to renew all the laminate flooring in the flat “following a flood of foul water”. However, the surveyor who attended on 17 January 2024 said there was no need to replace any of the flooring aside from in the lounge.
It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the expertise of the surveyor who attended more recently and decided the repairs were not required, as this was based on the most up to date information. However, it is evident the landlord did previously tell the resident it would complete these repairs. The landlord should have been clear in its position throughout to avoid any unnecessary distress and inconvenience. The landlord also could have resolved this much sooner had it followed up on the repairs in 2018 and 2022, which would have saved the resident distress and inconvenience.
After first agreeing to renew the 2 internal fire doors in February 2018, it took the landlord almost 6 years until it completed this on 13 November 2023. The resident confirmed to us that the landlord has renewed her bathroom floor, but there is no record to show when it completed this. We have seen no evidence the landlord has completed any of the other repairs promised in 2018. The surveyor who visited more recently reiterated that some of the works still need to be done. However, some of the other promised works from 2018 have never been mentioned again by the landlord or its agents. The Ombudsman will require the landlord to complete the works more recently surveyed but not yet completed. We will also require the landlord to complete an additional survey to determine if the other works from 2018 still need to be completed.
The landlord’s records show it raised a repair to fix the shower on 24 March 2022 as this was not working. It did not mark this repair as complete until 20 months later on 13 November 2023.
The landlord raised a job on 18 September 2022 to overhaul the windows and renew some of the glazing, which was cracked. It did not attend this job until 14 months later on 13 November 2023. The landlord said in its stage 2 response that its contractor had overhauled the windows and recommended no follow up works. However, the resident told us that the contractor agreed there was a crack in one of the windows but told her they would not recommend a replacement as this would be dealt with during cyclical works. The landlord has not provided us with any photographs of the windows from its inspection. Considering this, and the resident’s account of events, it is reasonable to require the landlord to complete another inspection of the windows to ensure these are safe and in good repair.
Due to the very long delays the resident faced for various emergency and non-emergency repairs, and the lack of urgency shown by the landlord despite the resident’s vulnerability, the Ombudsman finds severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repairs.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

Section 2.1 of the landlord’s complaints procedure and section 1.2 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) at the time of the complaint defined a complaint as “an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, actions or lack of action by the organisation, its own staff, or those acting on its behalf, affecting an individual resident or group of residents”.
Following the stage 1 complaint response the resident had an extensive conversation with the area manager. This conversation clearly demonstrated she was not happy with the response she had received at stage 1. She requested 10 items of repair with some conflicting the landlord’s stage 1 findings. At the very least the area manager should have confirmed with the resident if she wished to escalate her stage 1 complaint.
Sections 4.9 and 5.14 of the landlord’s complaint procedure matched the timescale requirements included in section 5 of the Code at the time. It said the landlord would:
1. Log and acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days.
2. Send a stage 1 decision in writing within 10 working days of acknowledgement, extending this by up to 10 working days if necessary by writing to the resident with an explanation of the delay.
3. Send a stage 2 decision in writing within 20 working days of the resident’s request to escalate, extending this by up to 10 working days if necessary by writing to the resident with an explanation of the delay.
It took the landlord 79 working days to send its stage 1 decision. This far exceeded the required timescale. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 17 May 2024, which was 41 working days after the resident’s escalation request on 20 March 2024.
The landlord’s compensation framework awarded £20 for missed or failed appointments. In its stage 1 response, the landlord acknowledged its contractors had failed appointments on 24 November 2023, 5 December 2023 and 5 January 2024. However, it only compensation for 2 of these appointments, totalling £40. It should have awarded £60 to cover all 3 appointments under its compensation framework. This omission was also a failure under section 6.2 of the Code at the time, which said that “any remedy offered must reflect the extent of any service failures and the level of detriment caused to the resident as a result”.
Section 6.5 of the Code at the time of the complaint said any resolution proposed by the landlord must clearly set out what will happen and by when, and that any remedy needed to be followed through to completion. Despite confirming in its stage 2 response that it would complete the repairs in relation to the extractor fans, living room flooring and internal doors, the landlord is yet to complete any of these works.
Due to the landlord’s failure to follow various aspects of its complaint procedure, compensation framework and the Code, and the long delays faced by the resident, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

The landlord’s record keeping

The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. Clear and accurate records provide an audit trail and enhance the landlord’s ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise. The Ombudsman released his ‘spotlight on knowledge and information management’ report in May 2023. The seventh recommendation in this report was for a landlord to develop key data recording standards across its organisations to ensure good records that supports its business.
The Spotlight report highlighted that, if information is not created correctly, it has less integrity and cannot be relied on. This can be either a complete absence of information, or inaccurate or partial information.
The landlord raised a repair for the kitchen floor on 7 January 2022. Its repair log shows this job “completed” on 13 November 2023. However, this is inaccurate because the landlord told the resident this job was not required and it never completed it. It would have been accurate to mark the job as “cancelled” rather than “completed”.
The landlord raised jobs on 14 February 2022 to renew all laminate flooring and to replace all windows in the property. It marked both these jobs as complete on 13 November 2023. However, it did not complete either of these jobs as suggested. It told the resident it would only agree to replace the flooring in the living room (which it is yet to complete) and that no window replacements were required. It was therefore inaccurate to mark both these jobs as completed. It should have added explanatory notes to its repair log to confirm why it was closing the jobs.
The landlord raised a job to replace the internal doors on 11 May 2022, which it marked as complete on 13 November 2023. This is another inaccurate record, as the landlord is yet to complete this work to date.
The repair log said the landlord completed the emergency repair for the broken light on 21 November 2023 (the day it was reported). However, this was inaccurate and the resident reported this again on 27 November 2023. As noted in this report, it took the landlord approximately 5 months to complete this repair.
One of the surveyors who had attended the property in February 2022 emailed a summary of their findings from the visit to the landlord on 13 March 2024. Prior to the surveyor sending this over 2 years after their visit, there does not appear to have been any central record documenting their findings from the visit as the landlord had to specifically request this information from the surveyor during its investigation in 2024.
While some of the record keeping failures identified occurred before the Ombudsman published the Spotlight report, others have occurred since its publishing. We have recently ordered the landlord to improve its record keeping practices as part of our orders on another case, and the landlord will report to the Ombudsman about this in due course.
Due to the numerous examples of missing and inaccurate records in relation to repairs and surveyor inspections, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Determination

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 adaptations.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s:
1. Handling of the management home move.
2. Complaint handling.
3. Record keeping.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of required repairs.

Orders

It is ordered that, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord sends the resident an apology written by the chief executive.
It is ordered that, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord provides the resident with a payment of £2,800. This is in addition to the stage 2 compensation of £685 already received by the resident, and comprises:
1. £500 for the delays and lack of updates in relation to the management home move.
2. £1,500 for long delays and failings identified in relation to the repairs.
3. £300 for the complaint handling failures and delays.
4. £500 for the various record keeping failures identified.
It is ordered that, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord begins to provide the resident with regular updates on her management move in line with its policy and procedure.
It is ordered that, within 12 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord:
1. Replaces the laminate flooring in the living room.
2. Replaces the extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom.
3. Overhauls the internal doors in the bedrooms and bathroom.
It is ordered that, within 16 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord completes a survey and all follow up works, if required, regarding the below previously agreed repairs:
1. Overhaul the cupboard door to the water tank.
2. Replace the bath panel.
3. Test the electrics, renew 2 double sockets to the bedroom and refix the doorbell.
4. Box in the pipework to the lounge, stairway and bedrooms, including painting the new boxing with white gloss.
5. Inspect the windows in the property for any cracks.