London Borough of Hounslow (202214239)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202214239

London Borough of Hounslow

24 May 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. handling of adaptations required to the resident’s property.
   2. handling of the complaint

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a three bedroom house with a garage and the resident lives with her daughter and son. There are multiple vulnerabilities and disabilities noted on file.
3. The resident needed adaptations to her home due to her daughter’s disabilities and these adaptations were recommended by the landlord’s approved  occupational health service, following a housing needs assessment. The occupational therapist (OT) recommended a side extension to the house with a ground floor bedroom and bathroom/toilet as the resident’s daughter had difficulty mobilising, as well as other significant disabilities.
4. The records show that the adaptations were originally approved in 2016, but there had been no progress. The resident raised this again in 2019, and another assessment was carried out and once again the adaptations were approved.
5. The resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 5 July 2021. She expressed dissatisfaction with the length of time that had passed since the adaptations had been recommended. She explained that despite undertaking a new assessment in 2019 to remind the landlord of the works needed,  it had still failed to make progress.
6. In its final complaint response of 11 January 2022, the landlord apologised for the delays and for the fact the resident had not been updated. She was advised that the work ( a downstairs toilet and shower room) would be programmed in by the landlord’s asset team and be assigned the ‘highest priority’ and that she would be contacted the following week and then on a regular basis to confirm a timeframe for the works to be carried out. She was displeased that the landlord’s response still offered her no clarity on when the works would take place.
7. The records show that the landlord commissioned another OT housing needs assessment on 4 February 2022 which recommended a full ground floor extension including a bedroom, shower / wet room, and toilet. The landlord confirmed receiving planning permission in February 2023 but no timeline for the works was shared. As an outcome to her complaint, the resident would like the works to be completed and compensation for the delays.

Assessment and findings

Scope

8. In her complaint, the resident mentions that the situation with the request for the extension dates back to 2016. Whilst this Service acknowledges this, Paragraph 42 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that we may not investigate complaints that 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. Although this Service is aware that major works for adaptations can be lengthy and incorporate various permissions, it would have been reasonable for the resident to complain to the landlord sooner. In line with this, this investigation focuses on matters relating to the complaint of 5 July 2021.

Dispute Resolution Principles

9. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
   1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;
   2. put things right, and;
   3. learn from outcomes.
10. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse affect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse affect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

The landlord’s handling of adaptations required to the resident’s property.

11. The landlord’s website states that residents who are disabled and finding it difficult to cope in their home ‘may be able to get adaptations carried out to your home to make it easier for you to use.’ ‘All adaptations are considered by the landlord’s Occupational Therapy Service who will recommend what works would help you the most’.
12. This Service has had confirmation from the landlord that it does not have an Aids and adaptations policy, therefore this investigation cannot take into account any timeframes which the landlord would have been expected to complete the adaptations by, in line with their own policies and procedures. This Service has, however, considered the landlord’s approach in accordance with what the Ombudsman would deem to be reasonable in the circumstance and in line with general good practice.
13. The resident’s daughter had significant disabilities, which required adaptations to the property. This consisted of building a ground floor extension with a bedroom and shower room/toilet. The landlord did refer the request to the occupational therapy as was appropriate, who carried out a housing needs assessment and recommended a ground floor extension and a bedroom and bathroom to be built on the ground floor. However, as at end of October 2022, these works had not been completed, nor was the resident given a timeline of when the works would commence.
14. Due to the significant disabilities and health conditions experienced by the resident’s daughter, the delay in communication and delay in completing the adaptations caused serious adverse effect. The resident’s daughter was left with no appropriate means to access her existing bedroom and bathroom, which are on the first floor, and no suitable alternative. The resident’s daughter has significant disabilities and has been left without a safe and suitable sleeping and bathing space. Furthermore, the resident advises that this has had a detrimental effect on her own health, due to having to take her daughter upstairs to bathe, when her daughter cannot mobilise safely.
15. There is no dispute that there was poor communication and significant delays in carrying out the adaptation works. In its Stage 2 complaint response of January 2022, the landlord apologised to the resident for the delays and it was appropriate that it did so. It also explained to the resident that it was investigating funding arrangements. It further advised the resident that works would be programmed in and it would ensure she was regularly updated on any progress of works. It did not update the resident and this is a failing on the part of the landlord.
16. Furthermore, the landlord did not provide the resident with any update on progress of works until the resident contacted this Service in October 2022 and this Service then chased the landlord to ask it to update the resident on progress of the works. The landlord wrote to the resident in October 2022 to advise her that it would be seeking planning permission. Since the request for the adaptations had already been approved in October 2016, and subsequent to the resident’s complaint of July 2021, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have sought planning permission at an earlier time. This Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord acted with urgency or made proactive attempts to progress the adaptations. The resident had waited a significant length of time and as at October 2022, still had no timeline or progress on the proposed works. This highlighted the landlord’s clear failure to manage her expectations.
17. Whilst this Service understands that completing major adaptations works can be a lengthy and expensive  process, it was inappropriate that the landlord had not kept the resident updated on what was happening, as it advised it would. Furthermore, the landlord did not update the resident to advise her that it was waiting for planning permission until October 2022, after this Service contacted it. It is unreasonable for the resident to have waited such a length of time, particularly given the impact she had reported it was having on her family and the wellbeing of her child. This would have compounded her stress and frustration.
18. Due to the lengthy delays in carrying out the works and  lack of communication throughout the period, the Ombudsman has determined that there was maladministration.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

19. The landlord operates a two stage complaints policy
    1. Stage 1 – where the customer relations team will refer it to the relevant service area for investigation and a response will be provided within 15 working days.
    2. Stage 2 – where the relevant service area will carry out a review of the complaint and the Director will send a response detailing the findings and the outcome within 20 working days. The response will also provide details about how to request a review if residents remain dissatisfied with how the complaint has been handled.
20. This Service’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) explains that a complaint should be defined 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. It states that landlords should recognise the difference between a service request and a complaint. A service request is a request from a resident to their landlord requiring action to be taken to put something right. Service requests should be recorded, monitored and reviewed regularly. A complaint should be raised when the resident raises dissatisfaction with the response to their service request.
21. With this in mind, on 5 July 2021 when the resident expressed dissatisfaction about the progress that was being made, the landlord should have logged this as a formal complaint. Evidence shows that instead, it was not until she sought to escalate matters on 8 November 2021 that the landlord logged this as a Stage 1 formal complaint. This was inappropriate.
22. While the landlord’s subsequent complaint response was issued within the timeframe set out in its policy, it did not apologise for the time it took to formally address the resident’s complaint and to provide a written response as the code requires. It also did not address the substantive issue that the resident had not had any clear communication regarding when funding would be approved and when works would commence. This caused the resident additional frustration and distress.
23. The resident escalated the complaint to a Stage 2 complaint on 4 December 2021, which the landlord logged on 6 December 2021. She requested clarification as to when the funding would be agreed and when works would commence. She further advised that her daughter’s health had deteriorated and had been hospitalised. The resident was experiencing stress and frustration and was extremely concerned about her daughter’s health, with no solution offered by the landlord in respect of a definitive agreement of funding or date for works to commence.
24. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 11 January 2022. Although the landlord did apologise for the delays and the lack of contact, it  advised the resident that she would be given ‘highest priority’ for the adaptations works and that the landlord would be in touch the following week to confirm a timeframe for the works to be carried out. The landlord failed to act on its promises to contact the resident.
25. This exacerbated the resident’s distress and frustration. It also meant that her daughter was left without appropriate sleeping and bathing facilities for an extended period of time, without any updates from the landlord. When the resident contacted this Service in October 2022, the landlord had still not provided the resident with a schedule of works. After contact from this Service, the landlord wrote to the resident on the 26 October 2022 to advise that it needed planning permission to carry out the works. Planning permission was granted in February 2023.
26. There are clear failings on the part of the landlord in respect of the complaint handling process. It did not accept her initial complaint of July 2021 as an official Stage 1 complaint, it did not address the substantive issue of the complaint and failed to update the resident or give the resident a timeline for works. This caused significant adverse effect to the resident in the form of stress, frustration and time and trouble.
27. Due to the above, a finding of maladministration is made, along with orders for redress.

Determination

28. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration on the part of the landlord, in its handling of adaptations required to the resident’s property.
29. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration on the part of the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders and Recommendations

Orders

30. In recognition of the landlord’s handling of the adaptations, it should:
    1. provide the resident with an apology for the delay and a schedule of works which indicate the exact date the works will commence.
    2. Pay the resident £700 compensation. This is also to recognise the absence of an adaptation which would have had a positive impact on the resident’s daughter’s life.
31. In recognition of the landlord’s handling of the complaint, it should award the resident £125 compensation.
32. The landlord should ensure that it provides this Service with compliance of the above orders within four weeks of receiving this determination.

Recommendations

33. The landlord should consider implementing an Aids and Adaptations Policy and Procedure.
34. The landlord should also review its complaint handling policy and procedure, in particular its timescales, in order for it to align with this Service’s Complaint Handling code.