Southern Housing Group Limited (202301490)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202301490

Southern Housing Group Limited

27 June 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of kitchen repairs related to pest control issues.
    2. Request for a replacement kitchen and bathroom.
    3. Associated formal complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is the assured tenant of the property, a 1-bed, first-floor flat owned by the landlord.
  2. The resident reported to the landlord that there were mice in the property on 25 May 2022. She then made a formal complaint about required kitchen repairs on 6 June 2022. She made previous kitchen repair requests between 2018 and 2020.
  3. In the resident’s complaint to the landlord on 6 June 2022, she stated she was unhappy with the delays in completing repairs, replacement of the kitchen and bathroom, and lack of response from its surveyors. She was seeking that it complete repairs as soon as it could and that it replaces her kitchen and bathroom.
  4. In its stage 1 response on 12 July 2022, the landlord stated that the resident’s kitchen was due for replacement in 2026. It organised for its surveyor to contact her imminently to inspect the property and schedule any required works. It could not provide a reason for the delay in contact from its surveyors and apologised for this, confirming that it had identified a service failure. It explained that it if it could solve issues with the kitchen by way of repairs, she would not receive a replacement kitchen until 2026, as planned. It offered £25 compensation for its lack of contact with her. It stated that if she wished to accept this offer as “full and final settlement” to contact it within 20 working days.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 5 September 2022 as the landlord’s surveyor had not contacted her. She stated its online portal had been updated, meaning she had lost all historical messages about the issues. She confirmed that the landlord had resolved the mouse issue but there were still entry points into her property that needed fixing. She finished the escalation request by saying that the landlord needed to look at her kitchen and bathroom.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 11 January 2023 stating that its repairs history showed that the resident had been reporting repair issues with the kitchen since 2020. It said it would ask internally when it would add her kitchen to its planned works program. It confirmed that a surveyor visit had not taken place yet. It stated it would contact the relevant team so this could take place and hoped to get the kitchen replacement moved forward. It also forwarded the required repairs to the kitchen units for scheduling. It identified failures in relation to repair delays to the kitchen and rodent entry points, no surveyor visits, and a delay in acknowledging her complaint escalation. It apologised for these and offered £100 compensation, along with a schedule of works for organising repairs and a surveyor visit by 6 February 2023.
  7. Works remained incomplete after 6 February 2023, which led to the resident bringing her complaint to this Service as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions.

Assessment and findings

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy categorises repairs as either emergency or routine. It gives no timescale for routine repairs, other than that it aims to complete them as quickly as possible. It will arrange all routine repairs by appointment. Alongside this, its repairs and maintenance procedure states that if a repair is the responsibility of the landlord, it should process the repair.
  2. The landlord’s pest procedure states that to avoid repeat infestations of mice and rats, the pest contractor must carry out proofing works as part of their treatment service. Where pests are gaining access because of structural or repair issues, the contractor should advise the landlord to ensure it organises necessary repairs and proofing works. It should place emphasis on blocking all holes and gaps connecting homes with neighbouring properties, communal, and external, areas.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy offers payments of £10 plus £2 per day up to a maximum of £50 for repair delays. This would commence from the date it agreed to complete the work and either did not attend or complete the repair. It will also make a goodwill payment of up to £25 in recognition of poor service. For multiple service failures, including acknowledgement of distress and inconvenience to a resident, it can make a payment between £25 and £50.
  4. The landlord has published its complaint policy online. It operates a 2-stage complaints procedure. Stage 1 complaints will be acknowledged within 5 working days and responded to within 10 working days of acknowledgement. A resident must escalate their complaint to stage 2 within 20 working days of its stage 1 response. It will acknowledge this within 5 working days and respond within 20 working days of acknowledgement. It can extend the response timescale at both stages if required, with an explanation and expected timescale to the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of kitchen repairs.

  1. The resident reported to the landlord that there were repair issues with the backs of her kitchen units on 6 June 2022. She was unhappy with delays, stating she had raised this with it the year previously and had been chasing it ever since. It has provided no evidence to this Service showing any contact between 2020 and 2022 and she has explained that following an update to the landlord’s online portal, all historic messages have been lost. However, the evidence provided does not demonstrate that it took any action to organise works following this complaint. This was not in line with its responsive repairs policy or repairs and maintenance procedure and was not reasonable in the circumstances.
  2. In its stage 1 complaint response on 12 July 2022, the landlord advised the resident that its surveyor would be in touch “imminently” to arrange an inspection of her property. It has provided no evidence to demonstrate that it did this. She emailed it on 5 September 2022, almost 2 months after its stage 2 response, to advise that she had received no contact from the surveyor and asked when works would commence. It took no further action with this until 5 December 2022. However, it still made no contact with her at this stage to arrange an appointment. This was not appropriate, and it showed little regard for her concerns. While the repairs policy does not specify a time limit for routine repairs, it does state that it should process repairs it is responsible for, and it had not done this.
  3. On 11 January 2023, almost 6 months after it provided a stage 1 response, the landlord emailed the resident to state it had raised a works order for the outstanding repairs in May 2022. It forwarded these internally for action. It provided its stage 2 complaint response on the same day and provided a schedule of works outlining the timescale for repairs and actions. It stated it would contact her about the surveyor inspection by 20 January 2023, then email its repairs team about the issues with kitchen units and follow up on pest control treatments and concealing of entry points by 6 February 2023. This was a positive step forward and showed a willingness from the landlord to rectify the ongoing issues.
  4. Also in the landlord’s stage 2 response, it acknowledged failings by not completing the actions agreed at stage 1 and noted that its earlier offer of £25 compensation to the resident was not proportionate to the failings it had identified. It offered £50 compensation for this as part of its overall offer of £100. The amount offered was in line with its compensation policy but remained disproportionate in the circumstances.
  5. The landlord emailed its contractor on 12 January 2023 to ask it to complete outstanding proofing works. The contractor attended on 3 February 2023 and completed a pest control treatment but noted that further plastering was required. It included this on its repair logs with a target date of 13 February 2023 but there is no evidence to suggest that it completed this. Its surveyor attended on 7 March 2023 and noted that the resident said that there was an outstanding job with its contractor and that it would need to remove the kitchen units and refit them. However, the contractor said that it had no outstanding jobs for works in the kitchen. The landlord confirmed the same from its own system internally on 20 March 2023, despite the earlier repair log stating plastering works were required. This was not in line with its repairs policy and did not demonstrate that it was monitoring its repairs or records from its contractor effectively.
  6. The resident chased the landlord a further 6 times between April 2023 and February 2024 in relation to repairs. On 31 August 2023, it confirmed internally that its contractors had attended and refused to complete the works as it would need to remove and reinstall all kitchen units. The contractor also said the kitchen needs to be replaced. It said that this meant that it required a further surveyor visit which did not take place. Correspondence from the landlord to this Service stated that it completed repairs in February 2024 and its repair logs show an appointment to repair a damaged cupboard on 18 March 2024. This was over 1 year since it provided a plan for works as part of its stage 2 complaint response. Its inaction was not reasonable or appropriate in the circumstances of this case and was not in line with its repairs policy.
  7. In conclusion, the landlord failed to complete repairs on multiple occasions and took over 20 months to complete them entirely. While its repairs policy does not outline a time for routine repairs, this was an excessive delay and left the resident chasing it for updates on numerous occasions. There were occasions when works had clearly been identified but it did not have an outstanding record of these, and this indicates a clear issue with record keeping in this case. It apologised and offered compensation in its final complaint response, but the remedies offered were not proportionate to the failings identified in this report. A further order for compensation will be made in the orders and recommendations section of this report.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a replacement kitchen and bathroom.

  1. As part of her complaint in June 2022, the resident advised the landlord that it had told her it would replace the kitchen and bathroom in 2018, but when its surveyor inspected the property, it said both were in a good state. She had been told by unknown sources that the kitchen had not been updated since 1998, 24 years prior. It responded to this in its complaint response on 12 July 2022, advising that it had checked internally, and her kitchen was due for replacement in 2026. It asked its surveyor to contact her and arrange an inspection. If it found that it could rectify the issues with repairs, she would have to wait until 2026. While it took over a month to confirm this, the response was fair and appropriate with an inspection being a proportionate way to address the concerns.
  2. On 5 September 2022, the resident chased the landlord as the surveyor had not contacted her as agreed. It requested advice from the surveyor internally on 5 December 2022 to see if any works were required and advised her of this. There is no evidence that it received a reply or that it contacted the resident following this. While the complaint handler was attempting to find information for her, it was unable to do so, and a lack of internal communication only sought to cause further frustration for the resident as it was unable to resolve her complaint.
  3. When it then provided a stage 2 complaint response on 11 January 2023, [NGK1]the landlord was unable to give an update to her about the replacement kitchen. It stated it would ask the surveyor to attend and found failing that it had not visited previously following an agreement to at stage 1. As mentioned previously, it offered compensation of £100, £50 of which was a goodwill gesture for the service failures she had experienced. It set a target date of 20 January 2023 for it to contact her about the kitchen replacement and surveyor attendance. This was a positive response, and it acknowledged its failings up to the point of its stage 2 response, providing an apology and actions going forward.
  4. The landlord contacted the resident about the kitchen replacement on 26 January 2023, 6 days after its target date. It apologised for the delay and advised that its records showed that it renewed her kitchen in 2006 during a void period. It stated that unless she could provide evidence that it did not complete this work, it would have to go ahead with information it held on record. It alternatively offered for a surveyor to attend and present a business case for the replacement of the kitchen. It asked her to confirm how she would like to proceed. This was a fair response and showed willingness to inspect the property.
  5. On 6 February 2023, the landlord requested that a surveyor visit the resident’s property to check the general condition of her kitchen. The surveyor attended on 7 March 2023 and reported that the kitchen did not need replacing and the renewal date of 2026 would stand. It took no further action after this, but it was fair of the landlord to rely on the opinion of its expert at the time of the report.
  6. The resident called the landlord to chase ongoing repairs on 31 August 2023. In case notes from the same day, it stated that its surveyor was due to revisit after its inspection on 7 March 2023 but that this had never happened. It stated that it should have escalated this internally, but it had not done so. It asked for a surveyor to be allocated to the case. She called it again in February 2024 as there had been no visit or contact from the surveyor. Internally, the surveyor advised it would not be reattending as its assessment of the situation remained the same. This was almost 1 year since its original visit and there had been several reported repair issues in this time, it would have been good practice to arrange a reinspection to assess whether the situation had changed following ongoing works.
  7. In a conversation with the resident on 24 June 2024, she confirmed to this Service that she has received a letter from the landlord stating it will replace her kitchen and bathroom as part of major planned works in the 2024 to 2025 financial year. As such, no orders for further surveys will be made.
  8. In conclusion, while it was fair of the landlord to rely on the opinion of its surveyor in calculating dates for the renewal of the resident’s kitchen, its communication was poor, and it did not arrange appointments in a timely manner. It also gave no attention to her parallel query about replacement of the bathroom. While its offer of compensation was in line with its policy, it was not proportionate to the failings identified in this case. A further order for compensation will be made in the orders and recommendations section of this report.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated formal complaint.

  1. The resident complained to the landlord on 6 June 2022. It acknowledged the complaint on the next working day, 7 June 2022 and began to investigate internally. However, it did not provide a complaint response until 12 July 2022. This was 26 working days later and exceeded its complaint policy timescale of 10 working days. It did not acknowledge the delay. It offered £25 compensation for its lack of contact in relation to its surveyor and stated that if she wished to accept this as “full and final settlement” she should contact it within 20 working days. It was inappropriate to refer to the offer as a “full and final settlement.” That is a legal phrase indicating that, if it she accepted the offer, the resident would not be able to make a further claim. That was misleading, given that she was entitled to make a further claim or refer her complaint to this Service.
  2. In an email to the landlord on 5 September 2022, the resident stated it was still not dealing with her complaint correctly and she rejected the compensation offer of £25. This was a clear escalation request, and it did not action this until 8 October 2022, 23 working days later. It did not acknowledge the complaint until 17 October 2022, 29 working days after she escalated it. It gave a response date of 14 November 2022. The delays in escalation and acknowledgement were not in line with its complaints policy and were not reasonable in the circumstances of ongoing repair issues.
  3. On 5 December 2022, the landlord apologised to the resident for the length of time since its last contact about her complaint. It said it would like to discuss the case with her to agree a resolution. There are no further records of contact until 10 January 2023 and the landlord provided a stage 2 response on 11 January 2023, 88 working days after the escalation request. It acknowledged this delay as part of its stage 2 response. It apologised for this and offered £50 compensation for this as part of its overall offer of £100. The remedies were in line with its compensation policy but did not consider the distress and inconvenience its failings caused to the resident.
  4. Throughout its complaint responses, the landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint point about the bathroom replacement. While its responses were fair and thorough in relation to other matters where it had information available, it had missed a key part of her complaint, instead focusing on issues with the kitchen. As mentioned previously, the landlord has now confirmed in writing that it will replace the bathroom as part of planned works in the 2024 to 2025 financial year and as such, it has rectified its lack of response to this. However, it is important that the landlord pays attention to all parts of a complaint raised by a resident.
  5. In conclusion, there were consistent delays in the landlord’s complaint handling, with only the stage 1 acknowledgement being provided to the resident within the timescales outlined in its complaints policy. This Service’s dispute resolution principles are to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. The remedies offered by the landlord in its stage 2 response were not in line with these principles. The amount offered did not appropriately take into consideration the level of failing identified and did not offer any explanation of how it intended to learn from these failings. However, it did offer a fair approach going forward to attempt to rectify the ongoing issues. As such, a further order for compensation will be made in the orders and recommendations section of this report.
  6. The Ombudsman has recently published a special report into the landlord and made a number of orders and recommendations in other investigations to this landlord about reviewing its complaint handling approach, repairs service and record keeping. The Ombudsman has therefore not made further recommendations around these aspects of service in this report but expects the landlord to take all relevant learning points from this case into account in its overall reviews of its handling of repairs, complaint handling and record keeping.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of kitchen repairs related to pest control issues.
    2. Request for a replacement kitchen and bathroom.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated formal complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident compensation totalling £400, broken down as follows:
    1. £100 as previously offered as part of its stage 2 response if it has not done so already.
    2. £100 for the failings identified in its handling of reported repairs.
    3. £100 for the failings identified in its handling of the resident’s request for a replacement kitchen and bathroom.
    4. £100 for the failings identified in relation to its complaint handling.
  2. The landlord must provide proof of compliance with the above order to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. This Service recommends that the landlord provides a more specific time period for the replacement of the resident’s kitchen and bathroom as soon as the information becomes available to it.

 

 

 

[NGK1]Always reintroduce the parties in each new paragraph.