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

Royal Borough Of Greenwich (202221169)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202221169

Royal Borough Of Greenwich

29 June 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 handling of:
    1. Repairs to the resident’s kitchen.
    2. Repairs to the resident’s fencing.
    3. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a flat with a garden.
  2. The resident first reported a defect with her kitchen unit to the landlord in January 2018. It attended the repair and found that another kitchen unit required repair. There was no evidence that this repair was completed.
  3. The landlord first raised work to address the resident’s fence on 13 August 2020. At that point, due to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, it did not carry out the repair as it was prioritising emergency and urgent repairs. The landlord’s repairs service resumed normal operations in August 2021.
  4. The resident reported to the landlord on 29 June 2022 that her kitchen units were uneven and their doors were old and warped. She subsequently raised a complaint with it on 8 August 2022 about the lack of repairs to her kitchen, which had deteriorated further since her report in 2018, and her fence, which was now badly dilapidated and allowed foxes to foul her garden.
  5. The landlord responded to the resident on 22 August 2022 It apologised for its delay in carrying out the repairs. It explained that the fencing repair had been delayed due to “contractual issues” with its contractor and offered £150 compensation for its delay. The landlord confirmed that it had arranged to inspect the resident’s kitchen on 30 August 2022 and would write to her to provide a start date for the fencing work.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint with the landlord on 30 August 2022 as she felt the compensation it offered her was insufficient. It provided its final response on 8 December 2022 in which it said it had attempted to contact her about the proposed scope of the kitchen work and acknowledged the fencing work had been further delayed. The landlord confirmed that the fencing would be inspected that day and said it would provide a revised offer of compensation to her once the repairs were complete.
  7. The resident told the Ombudsman on 13 March 2023 that she remained dissatisfied as the repairs were still outstanding and the compensation the landlord offered her was insufficient to address the repair delays.
  8. The landlord completed the fencing repairs on 21 March 2023. It commenced the kitchen repairs on 30 March 2023, but these were not completed as some parts were still required. On 17 April 2023, the landlord increased its offer of compensation to the resident to £400 and confirmed to the Ombudsman that it had ordered the remaining parts required to complete the kitchen repairs. The landlord confirmed to this Service on 27 June 2023 that it had not kept an appointment for 31 May 2023 due to an organisation-wide system issue. It said that the resident had been provided with a new appointment on 18 August to complete the repair.

Assessment and findings

Investigation scope

  1. Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which were not made to the landlord within a reasonable period after the issues arose. This would normally be within six months.
  2. The resident first reported issues with her kitchen in 2018. The complaint was raised in 2022. While some historical information will be included to provide context to the complaint, in accordance with the above, this investigation will focus on events in the months leading up to the formal complaint in August 2022. This is because, with the passage of time, it is not possible to establish the facts of the case and a reliable determination cannot be made on historical events.

The landlord’s handling of kitchen repairs

  1. The landlord’s tenant’s handbook confirms that its responsible for the repair and maintenance of kitchen fittings. The landlord’s repairs guide states that routine repairs, which are not emergency or urgent repairs, are to be completed within 20 working days.
  2. Therefore, when the resident reported to the landlord on 29 June 2022 that her kitchen units and doors were in a poor condition, it should have completed repairs to these by 27 July. It did not attend to inspect the kitchen until 30 August. It then did not commence work on the kitchen units until 30 March 2023, which was not a complete repair as parts for one kitchen unit door and drawer were unavailable. On 17 April 2023, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that it had ordered the remaining parts that day. To date, this outstanding repair has not been completed, and it is due to attend in August 2023.
  3. The landlord, therefore, took an excessive length of time to address the resident’s kitchen repair, taking nine months to begin the repairs. Part of this delay occurred between 8 December 2022 and 27 January 2023, when the landlord first attempted to confirm whether the resident agreed to its proposal to replace her kitchen units’ doors with white doors. The resident disputed that the landlord attempted to contact her; however, the Ombudsman is unable to determine either party’s account of this from the evidence available. Nevertheless, when the landlord’s first attempt at contact was unsuccessful, it could have done more to ensure that the repair was progressed expeditiously, such as by attempting contact through other means.
  4. On occasion, a landlord will exceed its normal repairs timeframes when a repair proves to be complex, or when specialist parts or equipment are needed. However, the landlord did not attempt to confirm which parts were needed until 8 December 2022, when it attempted to confirm the replacement parts with the resident. This was three months after it inspected the kitchen on 30 August 2022 and was an unreasonable and unexplained delay.
  5. There is no evidence of the landlord updating the resident on the progress of the repairs or attempting to manage her expectations about their completion timeframe. For example, after the landlord inspected the kitchen on 30 August it did not contact her again until 8 December. The resident chased the landlord for an update on her kitchen repairs on 8 January 2023 and nearly three weeks elapsed before it contacted her, on 27 January, to seek her confirmation that she was happy to have her kitchen units’ doors replaced.
  6. In its final complaint response the landlord explained that it would provide compensation for its delayed repairs once the work was complete and the full extent of the delay known. That was not reasonable, and counter to the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. The Code sets out that complaint resolutions should not be delayed while waiting for completion of work. Rather, any remedies should be provided relevant to matters at the point the complaint response should be issued (i.e. within 20 working days for an escalated complaint).Outstanding actions must still be tracked and actioned promptly, with regular updates provided to the resident, and further remedies offered if necessary and appropriate.
  7. The landlord eventually offered the resident £400 compensation in April 2023, after the fence repairs were completed, but with the kitchen repairs remaining unresolved. It did not break down how it had calculated the amount, and it is not apparent if it was for the fence issue, the kitchen issue, or both. For the purposes of this investigation we are assuming it was intended for both, i.e. £200 for each of the two issues. On that basis, the compensation was not proportionate to the significant scale of the delay with the kitchen repairs, the landlord’s poor communication, and the inconvenience and frustration caused to the resident. Accordingly, the landlord did not resolve the complaint reasonably.

The fence repairs

  1. The landlord’s tenant’s handbook confirms that it is responsible for the repair and maintenance of fences which adjoin public land. The landlord’s records from 6 September 2022 confirmed that the front garden fence and rear back and side fences required replacement as they adjoined publicly accessible land.
  2. While it is noted that the landlord was aware that the fencing required repair since 13 August 2020, there is no evidence of the resident raising this as an issue until she made her complaint on 8 August 2022. In line with the Scheme paragraph 42(c), this investigation centres on the landlord’s handling of the matter from August 2022.
  3. In accordance with its repairs guide, in the absence of any issues outside its control, the landlord should have completed the fence repair within 20 working days of the resident’s report (i.e. August 2022). The landlord did not complete the fencing repair until March 2023, over seven months later. That was clearly an excessive delay.
  4. The landlord acknowledged in its stage one response, on 22 August 2022, that it had not provided an “adequate service” and advised that it would write to the resident to provide a start date for the fencing work. It did not confirm an appointment to inspect the fencing until 8 December 2022, over three months later, when it confirmed that it had attended that day to inspect. A further inspection took place a month later on 4 January 2023. The resident chased the repairs twice on 8 and 24 January 2023, before the works were completed on 21 March 2023.
  5. The completion of the fencing work was excessively delayed. The landlord explained it was experiencing contractual issues in arranging the work. In that circumstance, updates to the resident were essential, so that she could be reassured that despite the delay and challenges the landlord was doing all it could to complete the repairs. As with the kitchen repairs, there is no evidence of the landlord keeping the resident informed or managing her expectations. These were failures by the landlord in its management of the fencing work and its communication. As with the kitchen repairs above, assuming the landlord offered £200 compensation to the resident for its failings, its remedies were not proportionate to the scale of the delays, poor communication, and inconvenience and frustration caused, leaving the complaint unresolved.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy and procedure provides for a two-stage internal complaints procedure. At the final stage of this procedure, the landlord should provide its final response to the resident within 20 working days of receipt of the escalation. This policy and procedure states that, if it is unable to meet either of its timeframes for response, it should contact the resident to explain why and provide an updated timeframe.
  2. The resident escalated her complaint on 30 August 2022 and the landlord provided its final response to her on 8 December 2022, over three months later. There is no evidence of the landlord contacting the resident to explain why its final response had been delayed, nor any evidence of it providing an updated timeframe to her to manage her expectations. This led to the resident having to chase the landlord for updates on 10 November and 2 December 2022.
  3. The landlord, therefore, unreasonably delayed in providing its final complaint response to the resident, and did not act in accordance with its own policy and procedure. It did not acknowledge its delay in its final response, nor offer any form of compensation to recognise her time and trouble, or inconvenience experienced, while she awaited its response.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of:
    1. Its handling of repairs to the resident’s kitchen.
    2. Its handling of repairs to the resident’s fencing.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of this report, the landlord must pay the resident:
    1. £400 for its poor handling of the kitchen repairs.
    2. £400 for its handling of the fence repairs.
    3. £150 for its delayed complaint handling.
  2. This total payment of £950 is inclusive of the £400 already offered. Evidence of payment must be provided to this Service by the deadline.
  3. Within six weeks, the landlord must conduct a case review of its complaint handling in this case, and prepare an action plan setting out how it intends to avoid making the same mistakes around delays, communication, and complaint remedies in the future. As part of this review the landlord must take heed of the Complaint Handling Code, and explain how it intends to ensure the Code’s requirements are embedded in its processes and adhered to in its day to day operations. The outcome of this review must be shared with this Service by the deadline.

Recommendations

  1. As noted in the report, the kitchen repairs remain incomplete, and the landlord has told this Service they are scheduled to be completed in August 2023. In the circumstances, if the repairs are not resolved by that date, it will be open to the resident to make a new complaint about the issue with the landlord. If that happens, the landlord will be expected to demonstrate that it has learnt lessons in how it handles the matter. If the resident remains dissatisfied following the landlord’s consideration of her new complaint, it will be open for her to return to the Ombudsman.