Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Brighton and Hove City Council (202218635)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202218635

Brighton and Hove City Council

11 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 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 request for a new kitchen.

Background

2.     The resident is a tenant of the landlord of a house.

3.     The resident has stated that her kitchen was in a poor state when she moved into her property in 2012. She has explained that the landlord informed her at the time that the kitchen would be replaced within the next 10 years. The resident has explained that she therefore contacted the landlord in July 2022, to ask for it to assess her kitchen for replacement.

4.     The landlord attended on 22 July 2022, and inspected the kitchen. It found that substantial repairs needed to be undertaken, such as replacing the damaged kitchen cupboard doors, drawer faces, counter tops, and part of a kitchen unit. The landlord also advised that a plumber should attend to find out if there was a water leak under the flooring. However, it did not advise that the kitchen should be replaced. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s assessment. The plumber attended on 5 August 2022, and they reported that the kitchen was in a poor state and needed replacing, as well as the flooring.

5.     Due to the contradictory statements and the resident’s dissatisfaction, the landlord sent another supervisor to the property on 23 August 2022. The supervisor concluded that further kitchen repairs should be undertaken, such as replacing all of the cupboard doors, drawers and counter tops, and removing the sink, as well as replacing a base unit support post and panel. They also raised a job for the floor to be repaired, as the water leak had been found.

6.     The resident then made a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 8 September 2022. She complained that the kitchen was “not fit for purpose” or “habitable”, but a “fire hazard” due to a swollen door, and that she wanted this replaced rather than repaired. The resident explained that she had been chasing the landlord since July 2022, yet had not had a proper response.

7.     The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint on 13 September 2022. It apologised for the condition of the resident’s kitchen. The landlord explained that 2 supervisors had inspected the kitchen and recommended that this be extensively repaired. It explained that the above repairs would be undertaken, and advised that it would contact the resident to assess the door, and that it would inspect and repair or replace the flooring on 16 September 2022.

8.     The resident asked to escalate her complaint to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure on 21 September 2022. She remained dissatisfied that her kitchen would not be replaced, as she felt that this was too small for her family’s needs, and in a poor state of repair. The resident requested that the landlord therefore reassess the kitchen for a replacement, and for the possibility of making this bigger.

9.     The landlord concluded that its first stage 1 complaint response had not addressed why the kitchen was being repaired rather than replaced. It therefore reassessed her complaint at stage 1, sending her an additional stage 1 response on 19 October 2022. The landlord further explained that the kitchen had been professionally assessed by it on 22 July and 23 August 2022, and that its supervisors had not recommended that this be replaced. It explained that, as a responsive repair team, it did not undertake renovations to make kitchens larger, and signposted the resident to its adaptions team for this instead.

10. The resident asked to escalate her complaint to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure again on 19 October 2022 with the same concerns. Additionally, she advised that she had been told by it when she moved into the property that she would receive a new kitchen within 10 years, which other properties had received when hers had not.

11. The landlord responded to the final stage complaint on 26 October 2022. It apologised if the resident had been told that her kitchen would be replaced within 10 years. The landlord explained that this was not the case, as the kitchen had only been installed in 2010. It explained that its kitchens would generally be replaced after about a 30-year lifespan, or when they were beyond economic repair, and so the resident’s kitchen was due to be replaced in 2043. The landlord further explained that 2 supervisors had inspected the property and concluded that this should be repaired and not replaced. It reiterated that, as a repairs service, it could not renovate her kitchen for this to be larger.

12. In her subsequent complaint to the Ombudsman, the resident has stated that her kitchen is beyond repair and needs to be replaced, saying that this was found to be “not fit for purpose” by the landlord’s operatives. She said that she also remains dissatisfied, as she states that it assured her that the kitchen would be replaced within 10 years in 2012. The resident would like the kitchen to be replaced and made larger to suit her family’s needs. The landlord subsequently reported to the Ombudsman that it carried out some of the above repairs to her kitchen, and assessed this for a fire door, on 26 May 2023, with further work booked for 8 June 2023.

Assessment

Scope of investigation

13. The resident has stated that, on moving into the property in 2012, the kitchen was in poor condition and the landlord informed her that her kitchen would therefore be replaced within 10 years, which is concerning as it then told her that this was only due for replacement in 2043. Under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, however, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 6 months of the matters arising. 

14. It is not possible for the Ombudsman to comment on historic conversations between the landlord and resident, as there would be difficulty in gaining evidence of this from such an earlier period. Therefore, this investigation will focus on the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for a kitchen replacement starting in July 2022, being within 6 months of her formal complaint to it about this in September 2022, and the information it considered in concluding that it would only undertake repairs.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a new kitchen

15. According to the landlord’s housing repairs and improvements handbook, it is responsible for repairing the structure of the resident’s property, including kitchen flooring. It further explains that it will treat repairs to broken kitchen units as routine repairs due within 20 working days, while it defines complex repairs as including extensive or specialist work that takes longer than 20 working days to complete. The landlord has a planned programme for replacing kitchens in its area to bring these up to its standard, and to the Government’s decent homes standard, but its handbook states that it must be contacted to find out when this is due.

16. The landlord’s website explains that it is still working through the backlog to its routine repairs caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. It apologises for any inconvenience caused, and states that it is working proactively to catch up and attend as soon as possible.

17. The landlord is expected to repair and maintain all property aspects that it is responsible for under its tenancy agreements or policies and procedures. It would be expected to assess repairs, and ensure that it undertakes an appropriate level of repair. The landlord does not have to provide a replacement that exceeds a necessary repair, as long as it is meeting its repair obligations.

18. The resident stated that she reported to the landlord that her kitchen was in a poor state of repair in July 2022. It therefore acted appropriately by responding within the housing repairs and improvements handbook’s routine repair timescale of 20 working days by attending this on 22 July 2022. The landlord inspected the kitchen area on that date, and it concluded that extensive repairs, which it was responsible for under the handbook, were needed to bring the kitchen up to standard, including to the kitchen units and flooring. It then sent a plumber to begin works on 5 August 2022. While there, the plumber reported that the kitchen was in poor condition, and would need replacing.

19. As the resident was also unhappy that the kitchen would not be replaced because the July 2022 inspection had not recommended this, the landlord re-attended the property and assessed the kitchen again on 25 August 2022. This was appropriate, as it behaved flexibly, and its further inspection suggested that it remained open to replacing the kitchen, if this was assessed as being necessary. The second supervisor nevertheless identified the same issues as the first, and they recommended more in-depth repairs for these. They again did not recommend replacing the kitchen. The landlord therefore acted appropriately by accepting the two supervisors’ expert advice in relation to repairing instead of replacing the kitchen as a whole, rather than that of a plumber, and by arranging for the more extensive repairs to be undertaken.

20. Overall, in this case, the landlord acted appropriately by attending the property within its housing repairs and improvements handbook’s routine repair timescale, and by assessing the kitchen to ensure that this was not beyond economic repair. As the resident remained unsure that the repairs were going to be adequate, it sent another qualified operative to assess the kitchen, and it concluded that repairs were what were required.

21. Additionally, the landlord checked the age of the kitchen, and found that this was only installed in 2010 and so, under both the Government’s decent homes standard’s 20-year replacement timescale and the landlord’s over 30-year one, the kitchen would not currently be due for replacement for at least another 7 to 20 years. It has nevertheless been committed to undertaking all necessary repairs to the resident’s kitchen to bring this back to an appropriate standard. This was reasonable, as the landlord’s housing repairs and improvements handbook obliged it to do so, but confirmed that it must be contacted to find out when its planned kitchen replacement programme was due.

22. The landlord’s corporate complaints procedure states that, if the resident remains dissatisfied with its stage 1 complaint response, it can either refer the complaint back to the department involved with recommendations for further action, when the stage 1 response was not sufficient, or it can escalate the complaint to the final stage. In its first stage 1 complaint response, it apologised if she had felt that it was ignoring her requests for works to the kitchen, and it appropriately explained that it had assessed her kitchen by sending 2 qualified operatives who had recommended multiple repairs, explained the repairs, and assured her that it would monitor these to completion.

23. The resident felt in her first escalation request, however, that the landlord had not addressed her complaint regarding why her kitchen was not being replaced. It therefore acted in line with its corporate complaints procedure by re-assessing its stage 1 complaint response, concluding that it did not specifically address her query in its original response. The landlord acted reasonably by clarifying with the resident that the reason that it would not replace the kitchen was that this was not in a state beyond economic repair. It explained that this had also not reached the age in which the kitchen should be replaced. The landlord additionally explained that, as a repairs service, it could not renovate the kitchen to make this larger. It acted appropriately by instead signposting the resident to the adaptions department for this.

24. The resident was unwilling for the kitchen repairs, rather than a replacement, to be undertaken initially. The evidence indicates that she has now permitted the landlord to undertake the repairs, which were due to have been completed by it on 26 May and 8 June 2023. Therefore, to try and resolve the resident’s concerns about her kitchen needing to be replaced, and its previous suggestions to her when she moved in and subsequently via its plumber that this would be done, it has been recommended below to do the following.

25. The landlord has been recommended to post-inspect its repairs to the resident’s kitchen following their completion, if it has not done so already, and provide her with the outcome of its post-inspection, explaining how this now meets its standard, and the Government’s decent homes standard. It has also been recommended to re-assess the kitchen for its planned programme for replacing kitchens, and to confirm to her when this is now due.

Determination (decision)

26. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for a new kitchen.

Recommendations

27. It is recommended that the landlord:

  1. Post-inspect its repairs to the resident’s kitchen following their completion, if it has not done so already, and provide her with the outcome of its post-inspection, explaining how this now meets its standard, and the Government’s decent homes standard.
  2. Re-assess the resident’s kitchen for its planned programme for replacing kitchens, and confirm to her when this is now due.