Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

The Guinness Partnership Limited (202124928)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202124928

The Guinness Partnership Limited

8 August 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 concerns the landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows and patio doors in the resident’s property.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a house.
  2. The resident has experienced ongoing issues with the condition of the windows. An inspection undertaken on 6 August 2020 recommended work to the lounge and kitchen windows, and to the patio doors. Work orders for the repairs were raised on 10 August 2020 and marked as completed on 19 August 2020. A further inspection held on 16 April 2021 recommended additional work to the patio doors.
  3. The resident called the landlord on 3 November 2021 and requested to raise a complaint. The landlord’s notes of the call described the elements of the complaint as:
    1. An appointment was due to go ahead on 3 November 2021 by 1pm, but at the time of the call, the contractor had not arrived.
    2. The resident had experienced difficulty in contacting the contractor.
    3. In two previous visits to the property by the contractor she was informed that the windows needed to be replaced, but no work had been done since the April 2021 inspection.
  4. A stage one complaint response was sent to the resident on 19 December 2021. The landlord informed the resident that:
    1. The contractor had been delayed by other appointments which resulted in it attending the resident’s property later than scheduled on 3 November 2021. The landlord apologised for the resident not being informed of the delay at the time.
    2. The April 2021 inspection and 3 November 2021 visit both recommended repairs to the patio doors and windows, not a full replacement. It informed the resident that the notes on its repair logs make no reference to new windows being required at the property and apologised for any misunderstanding.
    3. The landlord also apologised that the recommended work from the April 2021 inspection was not raised on its system. It confirmed that the work had now been raised and an appointment on 21 December 2021 had been agreed with the resident to complete the work.
    4. The landlord offered the resident £170 compensation, which it broke down as £150 for the delays in completing repairs and £20 for the delay in providing the stage one complaint response.
  5. Following an escalation request by the resident, a stage two response was sent by the landlord on 8 February 2022. The landlord stood by its position as set out in the stage one response. It also confirmed that the work to the windows had been completed on 17 January 2022, and that additional work including draught proofing, a mould wash and redecoration to the patio doors was completed on 28 January 2022.The landlord also informed the resident that the windows were found to be “in good condition and are fit for purpose” and that it would not consider a full replacement until the planned renewal date of 2033.
  6. In referring the complaint to this service, the resident described the outstanding issues as that she is still experiencing problems with the windows in the property and that she had been advised by the contractor that they needed to be replaced. As a resolution to the complaint, the resident requested that the windows and patio doors in the property were replaced by the landlord.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

  1. Section 2.1 of the tenancy agreement describes the landlord’s repair responsibilities. This, in part, states that the landlord is responsible for the maintenance of “windows, doors and door frames”.
  2. The landlord categorises its repairs as “Emergency” (attend and make safe within 24 hours and “Routine” (complete within 28 calendar days). The landlord defines an emergency repair as a repair that presents “an immediate health and safety risk”. The landlord’s repair policy also describes how it handles planned/cyclical maintenance, which is defined as “work carried out on an agreed cycle and as part of our planned reinvestment in our homes. This can be both substantial works carried out over a longer time frame. (e.g. upgrading door entry systems) or the cyclical repair or upgrade of components of a property or scheme (e.g. gutters and downpipes)”.
  3. In regards to how the landlord makes the decision to repair an item rather than replace it, the repairs policy states as follows:
    1. “We will normally repair rather than replace individual elements. However, where either the repair would be poorer value for money or ineffective, then we will replace the element. The decision about what to replace, when to replace it and what we will replace it with, will be made at our discretion. We will not normally replace elements in good working order to secure an exact match to an element that has been replaced. For example, we will not normally replace all kitchen cupboard doors because one cupboard door needs replacing. However we will seek to make a reasonable match with existing items wherever possible.”
  4. The landlord’s complaints policy says it operates a two-stage complaints process. When a complaint is received, the landlord aims to provide a response at stage one within ten working days. If the complainant is dissatisfied with the response, they can request an escalation of the complaint to the next stage. The landlord will then undertake a review of the complaint and provide a stage two response within 20 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.
  5. The complaints policy goes on to state that if the landlord is unable to meet its published timescales, that it will inform the complainant then agree a new deadline for the response.
  6. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider an offer of financial redress “when we are at fault and an apology or other remedy alone is not sufficient” and that it will “offer compensation based on the detriment caused to the individual or the household by our failure”. The compensation policy recommends a payment of up to £250 in circumstances where “the issue was resolved within a reasonable time which resulted in minor inconvenience having some impact on the customer or the household”.

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said she considers that the issues affecting her property have impacted her family’s health, including her son’s health as he has asthma which was affected by the damp and mould in the property. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments.  However, it is beyond the remit of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the repair issues and the resident’s health. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.

How the landlord handled repairs to the windows and patio doors in the property

  1. In line with its tenancy responsibilities as described above, the landlord was obliged to visit the property and inspect the windows when informed by the resident of problems she was experiencing on 13 March 2021. Following the inspection held on 16 April 2021, the landlord was required to carry out the necessary repair work within a reasonable period of time which, in line with its repairs policy, would be within 28 calendar days for non-emergency repairs. This clearly did not happen in this case. An appointment to resolve the repairs identified in the April 2021 inspection was not arranged until December 2021. It is not clear from the information provided why the repairs were delayed and therefore the Ombudsman can only conclude that this delay was unreasonable.
  2. In its complaint responses, the landlord acknowledged that it had not properly followed its repairs policy and there had been unreasonable delays. The landlord apologised, raised work orders to complete the repairs, explained what steps it had taken internally to improve its procedures and offered £170 compensation for its service failures
  3. 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.
  4. The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging its mistakes and explaining what it did wrong. It put things right by apologising to the resident and arranging for the work to be completed. It looked to learn from its errors by providing feedback to its repairs team to ensure following an inspection that all recommended work is then raised on its system to prevent a similar incident occurring. It also spoke with its contractor to inform it of the importance of contacting residents when its operatives are running late.
  5. It was also appropriate for the landlord to apologise and award compensation for the delay in providing the stage one complaint response. While the landlord had kept in regular contact with the resident during this period, it had not informed her of the delay or agreed a new date for the response in line with its complaints policy.
  6. The landlord’s offer of compensation was made in line with its compensation guidance, but was disproportionately low when the length of the repair delay is considered (from April 2021 to December 2021). The Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (which is available on our website) suggests a payment of £250 to £700 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration by the landlord, but where there may be no permanent impact on a complainant. As examples for when this level of payment should be considered, the guidance suggests “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”.
  7. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the landlord to pay an additional £130 compensation, to make the total award £300, in recognition of the seven-month delay in raising work orders to repair the patio doors, the 23 working–day delay in providing the stage one complaint response, and the inconvenience that this caused to the resident.

The landlord’s decision not to replace the windows and patio doors

  1. While there is no dispute that the work recommended in the 16 April 2021 and 3 November 2021 inspections was completed by January 2022, the resident remained dissatisfaction that the patio doors and windows were not replaced. The resident has also stated that she was informed by the landlord’s operatives on at least two occasions (including during the 16 April 2021 inspection) that the windows needed to be replaced. The was disputed by the landlord in its complaints responses. It has stated that it was satisfied that following the repairs that the windows were fit for purpose and would not consider full replacement until 2033, during its scheduled planned programme of work when the windows would have reached the end of their expected lifespan.
  2. The 16 April 2021 inspection recommended replacing the gasket seals of both patio doors in the lounge in addition to various other repairs in the property unrelated to the complaint. The inspection report makes no reference or recommendation relating to replacing the windows or the patio doors.
  3. The 3 November 2021 inspection was arranged following a report from the resident made on 22 October 2021 about gaps in window frames causing draughts into the property. Following the inspection, work was raised to “attend and carry out minor carpentry or joinery repair”. There are no notes in the repair logs recommending replacing the windows.
  4. Moreover, the landlord’s internal correspondence between its repairs team and the surveyors who visited the property confirmed that only repairs to the windows were recommended. An internal landlord email sent on 13 November 2021 stated that its planned maintenance team had informed its repairs team that the windows were installed in 2003 and would be assessed for replacement in 2033.
  5. It should be noted that that the landlord did not dispute the resident’s recollection that she had been informed that the windows should be replaced and apologised for the confusion that this caused. The Ombudsman does not dispute the resident’s account of what she was told verbally during the inspection but the landlord can only be expected to act on the information it is given and there is no evidence that the landlord was informed by its operatives at the time that the windows needed to be replaced.
  6. The landlord would be entitled to rely on the conclusions of its appropriately qualified staff and contractors that the windows and doors could be repaired and did not require replacement, and accordingly the decision to not install new windows or doors earlier was reasonable in the circumstances as there is no evidence to suggest that the windows or doors were currently beyond economical repair
  7. Social landlords have limited resources and they are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. In view of this, landlords are entitled to opt to repair damaged items such as windows and doors rather than replacing them. However, the windows should be replaced if they cannot be economically repaired. Therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord to attempt repairs in the first instance. If the repairs have not been successful, the landlord should consider whether it would be more appropriate to replace the windows ahead of the scheduled repairs programme in 2033. This is also in line with the landlord’s repair policy referenced above.
  8. The resident has informed this Service that the current condition of the windows in the property has had a direct effect on her son’s existing health conditions. While the landlord’s repair logs and inspection reports do make some reference to health conditions, it is not clear that any vulnerabilities have been flagged on the landlord’s system. Therefore, it is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident and updates its records regarding any medical conditions related to the resident’s household.
  9. As previously stated, it is not in the remit of this Service to make determinations on matters relating to health and wellbeing and therefore we cannot comment on this aspect of the complaint further.

 

 

 

 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of how it handled repairs to the windows and patio doors in the property..

Orders

  1. For the reasons set out above, the landlord is ordered to pay to the resident £130.
  2. 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.
  3. The compensation award is in addition to the £170 compensation already awarded by the landlord in its complaint process. This should also be paid to the resident, if the landlord has not already been paid.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord, if it has not done so already, contacts the resident and updates its records regarding any medical conditions related to the resident’s household.
  2. If the resident continues to report problems with the windows and doors, the landlord should consider whether the windows and doors should be replaced given that repairs have already been attempted which have not resolved the problem. The landlord should confirm its position to the resident and if the resident remains dissatisfied, she may be able to raise a new complaint about this through the landlord’s complaints procedure.