The complainant (Mr C) sought permission from Bridgewater Housing Association (the Association) to remove a bollard erected on a landscaped area at the rear of his home and to obtain a right of access or wayleave in order that he could park his car in his rear garden. Mr C's requests were considered but refused on policy grounds. The investigation found no evidence of maladministration or service failure.
Easter closure
Our office will be closed Friday 3 April to Monday 6 April for the Easter break.
You can still submit your complaint via our online form but this will not be processed until we reopen on Tuesday.
Housing Associations
The complainant raised a number of concerns in connection with his application to buy his home: that the Association took too long to complete the sale; that although the sale was dependant upon repairs being completed they too were delayed and that personal, confidential information was released to the complainant's solicitors without his prior approval
Complaint about Almond Housing Association Ltd - complaint was from a member of the public (referred to in this report as Mr C) that the Almond Housing Association (the Association) failed to redecorate his property after the installation of a new central heating system.
Shettleston Housing Association - complaint was from a woman (referred to in this report as Mrs C) about Shettleston Housing Association (the Housing Association). It concerned the way in which they dealt with her representations about the windows in her flat. She said that although she had been raising concerns about the condition of the windows since 2001, no effective remedial action was taken until the Housing Association eventually replaced them as part of a scheme replacement programme in 2005. She complained that the compensation offer ultimately made by the Housing Association was inadequate.
Irvine Housing Association - complaint was from Mr C who complained that Irvine Housing Association (the Housing Association) had failed in its responsibilities regarding the pruning of trees on the street outside his home. This he claimed led to overshadowing which affected his bedroom and patio and also caused problems with his television reception. Mr C was also concerned about the potential risks of large trees next to his home in high winds.
On 7 July 2005 the Ombudsman received a complaint from Mrs C about the decision of West Whitlawburn Housing Co operative Ltd not to pursue further her claim for compensation for damage to her wash hand basin.
Complaint about Clydebank Housing Association - complaint was from Ms C (the complainant) who complained that Clydebank Housing Association Ltd (the Association) had failed to maintain the communal areas to the front and rear of her house properly, and that they had not dealt appropriately with her representations on this matter.
-
Case ref:201801841
-
Date:November 2018
-
Body:Wheatley Housing Group Ltd
-
Sector:Housing Associations
-
Outcome:Not upheld, no recommendations
-
Subject:repairs and maintenance
Summary
Ms C complained that the association responded unreasonably to reports of water ingress in her home.
We found that the association responded to each fault within the timescales set out in their repairs and maintenance policy, acknowledged the inconvenience caused and offered a goodwill payment. We considered that this response was reasonable and did not uphold Ms C's complaint.
-
Case ref:201607398
-
Date:October 2018
-
Body:Sanctuary (Scotland) Housing Association Ltd
-
Sector:Housing Associations
-
Outcome:Upheld, recommendations
-
Subject:repairs and maintenance
Summary
Mr C complained that the association did not respond reasonably to his requests for repairs to his heating system. Mr C reported the failure of his heating system and the association considered several options including repairing the existing system, replacing it with a new system and disposing of the property altogether. The results of an inspection recommended that the system be replaced. This same recommendation had also been made the previous year, before Mr C had made his complaint. The association replaced the heating system seven months after Mr C made the complaint and responded to his complaint a couple of months after the matter was resolved. Mr C was unhappy with this response and brought his complaint to us.
We found that the association took longer than was reasonable to repair Mr C's heating, did not communicate effectively during this period and did not respond to Mr C in line with their complaints procedure. We upheld Mr C's complaint. However, we noted that the association made offers to Mr C that were roughly equivalent to his rent liability for the period he was without heating.
Recommendations
What we said should change to put things right in future:
- Consideration should be given to whether the association effectively co- ordinate and monitor the progress of repairs. This consideration should include the allocation of responsibility for completion of repairs, the assessment of the history of the property, the severity of the required repair, the timescale for completion, and the managing of customer expectations.
- Consider whether it would be more efficient and effective to use only one contact record system.
In relation to complaints handling, we recommended:
- Remind all complaints handling staff of the requirement to respond to complaints in line with the Customer Contact, Complaints Handling and Compensation – Scotland Procedure.
-
Case ref:201709104
-
Date:October 2018
-
Body:Glasgow West Housing Association Ltd
-
Sector:Housing Associations
-
Outcome:Not upheld, recommendations
-
Subject:applications / allocations / transfers / exchanges
Summary
Miss C complained about the way that the housing association handled her application to transfer to another property. She also complained that the association failed to take appropriate action in response to her reports of mice in her home.
We found that the association had reasonably followed their allocations policy and had used their discretion appropriately, taking into account the demand for available housing. We did not uphold this part of Miss C's complaint.
Regarding the mice in Miss C's property, we found that the association had liaised with the council's environmental health team to resolve the infestation, and that they had taken repair action to fill gaps as requested. We considered that they had responded reasonably, and we did not uphold this part of Miss C's complaint. However, we found that the association had misinterpreted advice that was given to them by the council's environmental health team, which influenced policy changes to remove the need for a case by case assessment of habitability in cases of mouse infestation. We, therefore, recommended that they revisit these changes to ensure that they are appropriate.
Recommendations
What we said should change to put things right in future:
- Any report of mouse infestation should be individually assessed to ensure the property remains habitable whilst the problem is addressed.